aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td:1473
+def ArmMveStrictPolymorphism : TypeAttr {
+ let Spellings = [Clang<"__clang_arm_mve_strict_polymorphism">];
----------------
Should this be a target-specific attribute?
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/Attr.td:1474
+def ArmMveStrictPolymorphism : TypeAttr {
+ let Spellings = [Clang<"__clang_arm_mve_strict_polymorphism">];
+ let Documentation = [ArmMveStrictPolymorphismDocs];
----------------
Why does this have a `__clang` prefix? That seems a bit strange given that the
attribute can be spelled `[[clang::__clang_arm_mve_strict_polymorphism]]`. I'd
probably drop the `__clang_` prefix entirely.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td:4793
+conversion. The aim is to prevent spurious ambiguity in ARM MVE polymorphic
+intrinsics.
+
----------------
I think adding a code example of correct vs erroneous code would be useful.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td:4796
+However, this attribute does not prohibit lax vector conversions in contexts
+other than overloading.
+ }];
----------------
If you have an easy code example demonstrating this, that would be useful as
well.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaType.cpp:7548
+ ASTContext &Ctx = state.getSema().Context;
+ type = state.getAttributedType(
+ createSimpleAttr<ArmMveStrictPolymorphismAttr>(Ctx, attr), type,
----------------
So this attribute can be written on any type? I would have expected it to be
limited to just types that can interact through vector operations. Does it make
sense to declare, for instance, a struct having this type?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72518/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72518
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
