erichkeane wrote: > > We have 2 options: > > > > * Wait for llvm to get improve their handling of assumption based > > optimizations. > > * Proceed with this work hoping this encourages work on the optimizer. > > The standard also mentions that `__has_cpp_attribute` should return `0` ‘if > an implementation does not attempt to deduce any such information from > assumptions’ [dcl.attr.assume], so another option would be to just have it > set to `0` for the time being and just not emit anything until that’s not an > issue anymore.
in this patch you ARE emitting the llvm assume, so I believe we ARE trying enough with this patch to mark it. So `__has_cpp_attribute` needs to be properly populated. I think the confusion/conflict between this and clang::assume needs to be figured out. These two should just be, as close as possible, spellings of the same thing. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81014 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
