ioeric added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24862#550654, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24862#550646, @ioeric wrote: > > > Acked, and I totally agree with you :) It's just that the change in this > > patch would still be valid after the underlying bugs are fixed, so I > > thought it was fine to fix those bugs after this. > > > I might be confused then (this happens from time to time) -- are the changes > in this patch still necessary after the underlying bugs are fixed? Sorry for the confusion. I guess I should've been clearer in the comments and patch summary... The changes would've been what we wanted even without the underlying bugs and would not be reverted after the bugs are fixed. https://reviews.llvm.org/D24862 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
