erichkeane wrote: > We also need to figure out what to do w/ `clang::assume`, because the entire > situation with the two being separate attributes is a bit of a mess, as > @erichkeane also pointed out. That can probably be resolved separately from > the RFC, however—though I’m not that familiar w/ `clang::assume`, so I may be > wrong about this.
Yeah, I'd really like to figure that one out a bit, but I'm still thinking about it. This RFC is going to be our 'first order' issue though, so if we can get that solved first, we can figure out whether this is something we need to do, or can defer. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81014 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
