codemzs marked an inline comment as done. codemzs added a comment. In D149573#4332549 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D149573#4332549>, @tahonermann wrote:
> I reviewed about a third of this, but then stopped due to the `__bf16` vs > `std::bfloat16_t` naming issues. I think the existing names that use > "bfloat16" to support the `__bf16` type should be renamed, in a separate > patch, and this patch rebased on top of it. We are sure to make mistakes if > this confusing situation is not resolved. @tahonermann, thank you for your review and highlighting the naming issues with `__bf16` and `std::bfloat16_t`. I agree that reversing the type names will improve readability and maintainability. I considered this while working on the code and appreciate your suggestion to address it in a separate patch before rebasing this one. ================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Lex/LiteralSupport.h:75 bool isBitInt : 1; // 1wb, 1uwb (C2x) + bool isBF16 : 1; // 1.0bf uint8_t MicrosoftInteger; // Microsoft suffix extension i8, i16, i32, or i64. ---------------- tahonermann wrote: > Is this for `__bf16` or for `std::bfloat16_t`? Its for `std::bfloat16_t`, I don't believe `__bf16` has a literal suffix. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D149573/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D149573 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
