benlangmuir added a comment. > I agree that `exclude` makes more sense for `requires excluded` as a > "supported" feature, but if this is another egregious hack for Darwin, I > don't think it matters which we choose.
Sure, I'm just as happy to use `textual`, since every case I've seen that's the more correct behavior. > (Maybe we should also check the module name here?) I found another use of this pattern in our Tcl module. I suspect when I look back at older versions of the SDK I'm going to find more of these cases. How about we don't limit this hack to specific modules, but we add a warning to say it's treating these as "textual". http://reviews.llvm.org/D10423 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
