arichardson added a comment. In D86713#2242354 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D86713#2242354>, @JakeMerdichAMD wrote:
> In D86713#2242300 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D86713#2242300>, @arichardson > wrote: > >> In D86713#2242253 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D86713#2242253>, @JakeMerdichAMD >> wrote: >> >>> LGTM, again assuming tests pass locally (patch did not resolve). >>> >>> Out of curiosity, is _Atomic on your radar? I found some code in clang >>> proper that handled restrict and _Atomic together. C/C++ have way too many >>> qualifiers... >> >> I have not looked at _Atomic yet and it's probably low priority for me >> unless it's a trivial change. >> My main motivation with these changes is to format a `__capability` pointer >> qualifier correctly (an extension that we add for our out-of-tree CHERI >> C/C++ dialect). > > I don't know of anyone who uses it yet, so just adding it for posterity, > definitely not a blocker. Were you planning on handling `__capability` > directly or in a user-configurable option? I can imagine other ad-hoc pointer > qualifiers specific to static analysis tools or as properly-ifdef'd aliases > of `__attribute__(...)`, so an option might be useful. I'm not sure yet what the best solution is. I was thinking of either a) option to treat double-underscore prefixed strings after `*/&` as qualifiers (probably on by default, but not sure about that). b) adding a config option with a list of strings that should be treated as qualifiers c) Adding a new __capability keyword to clang-format since it already includes things such as Qt-specific keywords. d) Option b) but with __capability included in the default list of qualifiers. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D86713/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D86713 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
