ychen added a comment. In D128745#3834387 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128745#3834387>, @hubert.reinterpretcast wrote:
> In D128745#3834313 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D128745#3834313>, @ychen wrote: > >> I think the consensus is some flag is needed to put it back to legacy >> behavior just in case. > > I am not sure there is strong consensus to add a flag "just in case". > Historically, many DRs had effects on overload resolution (via SFINAE or > otherwise). Once we start adding flags "just in case", we might end up having > a lot of them. These flags can exacerbate fracturing of the ecosystem. New flag or not, as long as we allow users to use the old behavior, it is already fracturing the ecosystem. Do you mean (1) we shouldn't give the user the choices or (2) we allow users to use the old behavior but only for a few releases and then remove the flag? I think (1) is a little bit harsh but I would say it is disruptive. (2) is more user-friendly. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D128745/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D128745 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
