MyDeveloperDay added a comment. In D80144#2042926 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D80144#2042926>, @JakeMerdichAMD wrote:
> This is a great improvement in readability. I think this will get in here > before it does for clang proper :D > > Likely/unlikely also seem to be supported on while, do-while, and for loops > (case statements too, but that's not relevant). Should we also apply > identical logic there? Far less useful/common than plain if's so it's not a > blocker, but it's best to be consistent and I can imagine some decent use > cases. I struggled to find decent examples, cppreference.org and the standard is very think on the ground. We should handle those cases but I feel maybe small increments are better as its not common code. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80144/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80144 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
