kadircet added a comment. Sorry I think I've failed to explain my point. My concern is not about changing the way clang is parsing the code.
I am saying that people might make use of compiler extensions by guarding their code with GNUC macros. Today we know that having 4.2.1 for GNUC version in clang works for those use cases (one way or the other clang is able to compile majority of the code out there people put behind a guard of `GNUC <= 4.2.1`). But people might make use of different compiler extensions while guarding for higher GNUC versions and they are probably not tested as extensively today. Hence I am saying that those will get broken in weird ways (and implicitly), while they are working today. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D107304/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D107304 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
