kadircet accepted this revision. kadircet added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
tl;dr; LGTM, from my side as long as you are also happy with the extra complexity introduced by this to all call sites. As told in the offline discussions, only problem I have with this approach is its intrusiveness. But arguably all of the call sites that cares about what to do in such situations already has some sort of handling themselves. So I am OK with landing this generic situation and adding some more mental overhead to all of the callers, hopefully we could come up with some helpers that would enable callers to choose one behavior or the other all the time and get rid of extra complexity(not sure if they are likely to stick though). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71345/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71345 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
