Sirraide wrote: Since we didn’t bring this up in the RFC, do we have any idea as to what we should do with `[[clang::assume]]`?
My suggestion would be to keep the current semantics for `[[clang::assume]]` (and `__attribute__((assume))`, but probably *not* `[[assume]]`) iff the argument is a string literal—mostly because a string literal would always evaluate to `true` anyway, so there is literally nothing to be gained from writing `[[clang::assume(string-literal)]]` anyway if we interpret it as C++23’s `[[assume]]`. 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
