jdoerfert added a comment. In D125378#3506954 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D125378#3506954>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In D125378#3506446 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D125378#3506446>, @jdoerfert > wrote: > >> What I would suggest, if you want to use C/C++ attributes (which makes sense >> to me), is an attribute that avoids undef or introduces frozen: > > I would prefer to avoid this approach for the moment. Such an attribute is > highly focused on how the backend works and I'm not convinced that users in > general would know when or how to properly use it. I believe all of the > functions which need to be marked are known, and so we can keep an internal > list of "interesting" functions that need special attention during clang > codegen. If we later find that there's a wider need that cannot be handled > transparently like this, we can reevaluate what to expose to users via an > attribute at that point. Works for me. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D125378/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D125378 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
