erichkeane wrote: > > Thank you working on this. I'm really like this feature! I've a question, > > do we have any further plans to support GNU extension attributes(e.g. > > **attribute**((aligned)))? Although it is not included in the paper. > > No, sorry! > > My goal here is to increase conformance, not to invent new extensions. If > someone wants to do that work, they would have to motivate the change, do the > design leg work and synchronize with GCC. More generally, supporting GNU > syntax in relatively new, C++ specific constructs is probably of limited use. > If there were attributes useful in structured binding that don't yet have a > `[[]]` spelling, we should probably would want to fix that instead.
Agreed 100%. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89906 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
