kazu added a comment. In D139229#3967666 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D139229#3967666>, @jansvoboda11 wrote:
> Sorry for the noise, didn't realize this will trigger Herald rules. Wanted to > check with @kazu if this looks fine in principle and if it should be split up > into multiple commits (e.g. per project). I'm personally OK with one giant patch if it is purely mechanical. I am OK with CTAD also. IIUC, CTAD variables are sort of the best of both worlds -- `auto` and fully-specified types like `SaveRestore<bool>`. It's a bit more descriptive than `auto` but less verbose than fully-specified types. @MaskRay @dblaikie Any thoughts? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D139229/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D139229 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
