AaronBallman wrote: > > I don't think I will be able to work on that the discussed Clang > > diagnostics anytime soon. Unless someone else is volunteering to implement > > it, that may not be implemented at all. > > So, I'd like to hear explicit consensus is that folks are generally OK to > > submit this _without_ such a diagnostic. > > Oh, I might have misread or misunderstood the discussion, but I didn't have > in mind that we would block this patch from making progress on having a Clang > diagnostic. Did other people in this conversation have that expectation? > > Edit: In other words, I think we should ship this and then adding a warning > is a nice-to-have followup to reduce the likelihood of people falling into a > portability trap.
I think that's a reasonable path forward. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66576 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
