nickdesaulniers marked 2 inline comments as done. nickdesaulniers added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst:1584 +Outputs may be used along any branches from the ``asm goto`` whether the +branches are taken or not. ---------------- void wrote: > efriedma wrote: > > Maybe put a note about earlier releases, so people don't get confused if > > they use newer documentation than their version of clang. > > > > Is there any chance we want a dedicated __has_extension flag? > > Is there any chance we want a dedicated __has_extension flag? > > Might not be a bad idea just in case they have more than one compiler version > they're using. Then again, if they add code to use this feature, they're > fairly committed to the assumption that it'll "just work" even with a > __has_extension flag...(Remember that we currently don't actually warn if > they're using the outputs on the indirect branch. We just specify that such > behavior is undefined.) > > I think a strongly worded note here that it's available with Clang 16+ (or > whatever) is going to be slightly better. It'll force them to use macros to > support multiple compiler versions, making their code wicked ugly, and them > possibly coming up with better ways to ensure that the correct compiler is > used for this feature. I've added that as a separate commit https://reviews.llvm.org/D143205 to not hold this up. PTAL. Open to better names for the identifier. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D136497/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D136497 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
