cor3ntin added a comment. In D108742#2970263 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108742#2970263>, @rsmith wrote:
> I assume this is intended to form part of the implementation of > https://wg21.link/p2348 and so shouldn't be considered for review right now? Yes, I wanted your feedback anyway but that was before I realized `\n` was hardcoded in many places in the lexer, notably in comment parsing. Which makes me question my entire reasoning. Sorry for the noise. > Drive-by observation: under P2348 <https://reviews.llvm.org/P2348>, Clang's > behavior of treating `\n\r` as a single new-line would be "non-standard" > (requiring special phase 1 mapping). Is that intentional? `\n\r` is used as a > new-line character on old Mac systems. Somewhat. `\n\r` is not described by Unicode so we could either mandate that all implementation support that or leave it as implementation-defined mapping. Correct me if I am wrong, but as the line number is itself implementation-defined, whether there are one or 2 line breaks would not materially affect the standard, either way. But also, when I looked at it, I was under the impression that older macs used a single `\r`. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D108742/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D108742 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
