rsmith added a comment. In D104975#2944313 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D104975#2944313>, @cor3ntin wrote:
> @rsmith: I modified the script locally to support dxx: dup PXXXX - let me > know if you think that's a good solution Not sure if that's a typo: did you mean "sup" rather than "dup"? In this case, it seems like "sup" is right if the old DR resolution no longer applies. (If the old resolution does still apply, but was generalized, then I think we should just leave the DR status table alone for that issue, because that issue's resolution is still implemented.) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D104975/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D104975 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
