egorzhdan added a comment. In D121283#3373560 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121283#3373560>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> why do we support multiple attribute *specifiers* in the same pragma? I would > not expect to be able to mix attribute styles in the same pragma given that > all of the individual styles allow you to specify multiple attributes within > a single specifier I don't think I have a strong use case for this. It seemed consistent with the way multiple attributes can be added for individual declarations, e.g. `__attribute__((cdecl)) __declspec(dllexport) [[noreturn]] void f()`. But we can prohibit multiple specifiers within a single pragma if you think that this is not a good construct to support. In D121283#3373560 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121283#3373560>, @aaron.ballman wrote: > why is whitespace the correct separator as opposed to a comma-delimited list? My motivation for this was also consistency with the syntax for attributes in individual declarations. Given that attribute specifiers are delimited by space for individual declarations (`__attribute__((cdecl)) __attribute__((noreturn)) void f()`), I think it would be unintuitive to require commas for attribute specifiers in pragmas when we could instead reuse the existing syntax of space-delimited attribute specifiers. In D121283#3373560 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121283#3373560>, @aaron.ballman wrote: > Also, I'd expect there to be some documentation changes along with this patch > and a release note. Good point, thanks, I will add those to this patch. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D121283/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D121283 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
