aaron.ballman added a comment. In D140756#4099593 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D140756#4099593>, @vedgy wrote:
> I meant that the commit message of > https://reviews.llvm.org/rG79571aa2103c95760a07e3549d8636379e4948f0 > misleadingly refers to this review's commit. But `CINDEX_VERSION_MINOR == 63` > is for previous commits. This commit will require incrementing > `CINDEX_VERSION_MINOR` again to `64` in Clang 17. Hopefully my > preamble-storage patches will also be included in Clang 17 and share the same > minor version `64` :) Hmmm, I thought 0a51bc731bcc2c27e4fe97957a83642d93d989be <https://reviews.llvm.org/rG0a51bc731bcc2c27e4fe97957a83642d93d989be> landed before we did the branch (and so was the last change in Clang 16) and we don't have any new CIndex commits since then to bump it to 64 (yet). However, now I see that it almost made the branch but was reverted https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/1af716499d6bc29afd9ff2903200890df774859f (though we had other changes in Clang 16 justifying the version bump, such as 5c67cf0a7fdc00c9b9c55578b770e768f5618bed <https://reviews.llvm.org/rG5c67cf0a7fdc00c9b9c55578b770e768f5618bed>). So I think you're right, we need one more commit on main to bump to `64` because of 0a51bc731bcc2c27e4fe97957a83642d93d989be <https://reviews.llvm.org/rG0a51bc731bcc2c27e4fe97957a83642d93d989be>. And yes, I think the preamble storage patches will be in Clang 17 and share the same minor version. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140756/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140756 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
