Sirraide wrote: > > We also need to figure out what to do w/ `clang::assume`, because the > > entire situation with the two being separate attributes is a bit of a mess, > > as @erichkeane also pointed out. That can probably be resolved separately > > from the RFC, however—though I’m not that familiar w/ `clang::assume`, so I > > may be wrong about this. > > Yeah, I'd really like to figure that one out a bit, but I'm still thinking > about it. This RFC is going to be our 'first order' issue though, so if we > can get that solved first, we can figure out whether this is something we > need to do, or can defer.
I’d imagine the RFC and the ensuing discussion are gonna take a bit anyway, so we ought to have some time to think about this in the meantinme 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
