cor3ntin wrote:
@EricWF we decided to hold off (we keep finding monor issues so it needs more
backing) - can you use either the major clang version or __has_builtin as a
discriminant for the time being?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142936
__
EricWF wrote:
I'm OK with this, but @ldionne should be the one to approve.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142936
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/AaronBallman commented:
This has been in the tree for less than a month and we've not had a release out
to the public with it yet, right? That seems a bit premature if we were waiting
for some user experience before flipping the switch. I don't have a good
intuition for how
https://github.com/cor3ntin created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142936
The language of side seems fairly stable.
Setting the feature test macro will ease implementation in standard libraries.
>From d035db665337550d41cee85bb962943fa6b6c097 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Corentin Ja
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Corentin Jabot (cor3ntin)
Changes
The language of side seems fairly stable.
Setting the feature test macro will ease implementation in standard libraries.
---
Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142936.diff
3 Files Affec
