MaskRay added a comment. In D108905#4654561 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108905#4654561>, @smeenai wrote:
> This looks great to me, thanks. @rjmccall should sign off on it though. @rjmccall Are you happy with this opt-in option? In D108905#4654626 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108905#4654626>, @ChuanqiXu wrote: > LGTM since this is exactly what we do in the downstream. The effects of the > change in our workloads is 4% size reduction in a coroutine intensive > project. (But it requires the coroutine's final suspend can't except via > symetric transfer. I was meant to send a paper to WG21 to discuss this). > After all, this should be a win for most projects. > > We need to mention this in the docs and the ReleaseNotes since we add a new > flag. > > To make this self contained, we need to add a check in the frontend and emit > errors if the compiler find the throwing exception's destructor may throw. > This is not required in the current patch but it may be good to add a FIXME > or TODO somewhere. > > (BTW, the Phab itself is extremly slow now. So if we want more discuss on > this, let's move this to Github?) The slowness was due to a malicious/aggressive crawler. I have fixed it and updated php-fpm config:) https://discourse.llvm.org/t/phabricator-is-very-slow/73132/14 Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D108905/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D108905 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
