xbolva00 added a comment. >> they parse the attributes first then attempt to parse a declaration; if >> that fails, they fall back to parsing a statement
Well, I don’t think this reparsing is ideal in terms of compile time either. If we really care about attributes on implicit ints: I don’t think that parsing according to attribute name is so bad solution - if only “possible” issue is same attr. name for stmt and decl for some future attribute - let’s talk with GCC devs and make a deal about it. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64838/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64838 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
