cjdb added a comment. In D107292#2920637 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D107292#2920637>, @dblaikie wrote:
> Not a huge objection - but minor quandry: What's the motivation for this > patch? I don't know of any codebase that encourages/uses the alternative > tokens and I wonder if adding more usability to them is a worthwhile > investment in clang's codebase complexity, etc. There are codebases that use them (all of my non-Google, non-LLVM code does, for example, and I'm not the sole user: just a loud one). The motivation for this warning is essentially to catch someone who misunderstands/misreads the diagnostic of what's currently in D107294 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D107294>. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D107292/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D107292 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
