jhuber6 abandoned this revision. jhuber6 added a comment. In D131639#3755866 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131639#3755866>, @jdoerfert wrote:
> I think the code as is upstream is fine. The test input is problematic. There > is no guarantee, or even any argument, that stdbool is not included by the > compiler or any header (system or not). If the user writes conflicting cod > with the system, that calls for problems down the line. > > Long story short, I'd abandon this for now. I agree, I will abandon this revision and close the associated bug. In D131639#3755699 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131639#3755699>, @ivanrodriguez3753 wrote: > In D131639#3749633 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131639#3749633>, @jhuber6 wrote: > >> I think it's perfectly reasonable to include system files as part of a >> toolchain. > > I think it comes down to a matter of inconveniencing the user versus the > developer. We usually go with the latter. I don't particularly agree with > your statement I quoted above, but I can't say I'm an expert in this area. > I'll see what others have to say. I've already pulled this into our fork so > it doesn't make a difference to us, but I did think it would be useful to get > input from the community on whether or not we should pull this in to upstream. > > Thanks for your input and responses. I'm glad this helped you fix it on your end, thanks for opening an issue for this. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D131639/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D131639 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
