jyknight added a comment. I agree that's the expected semantics. I think those semantics are unfortunate, but they're not gonna change. IMO it would've been better if you had to opt-in to "no side effects" via `__attribute__((const))` or so.
But I wonder why you think we should be discouraging people from writing "asm volatile" for things that are implicitly treated as having side-effects? It's quite non-obvious that adding an output argument to an existing asm statement changes whether it's treated as having side-effects, and I don't think it improves a codebase to make people lay out that trap more more frequently. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D118297/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D118297 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
