Anastasia added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/OpenCLBuiltins.td:54 +// Extension associated to a type. +class TypeExtension<string _Ext> : AbstractExtension<_Ext>; + ---------------- I am trying to understand why would we need a special abstraction for the type? Would it not be easier if we just guard the BIFs by the extensions that allow the use of the type? We would need to separate the definitions of course but this can be more helpful in order to understand what overloads are available conditionally? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100209/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100209 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
