timshen added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/SIMDIntrinsicsCheck.cpp:75 + // libcxx implementation of std::experimental::simd requires at least C++11. + if (!Result.Context->getLangOpts().CPlusPlus11) + return; ---------------- MaskRay wrote: > lebedev.ri wrote: > > Is it reasonable to suggest to use `<experimental/*>`? > > I would guess it should be `CPlusPlus2a` > Added a check-specific option `readability-simd-intrinsics.Experiment`. > > > Is it reasonable to suggest to use <experimental/*>? I think there are two approaches to proceed: 1) We just warn the users, but don't suggest <experimental/simd> fixes. 2) We warn and suggest <experimental/simd> fixes, but only when a flag is turned on (off by default). The flag documentation should clearly include "suggest <experimental/simd> API". I'm not sure which one fits better. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D42983 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
