Sirraide wrote: > Of the three, I lean towards 3 actually, I think that is perhaps the BEST > idea, and is perhaps supported by our existing infrastructure already (if you > have Attr.td set its targets right?). I'd like to see what Aaron has to say, > but I THINK that is my preference baring any concerns.
Yeah, I agree that that is probably the best option (though we should probably still update the diagnostic I mentioned, because it’s not obvious imo that `[[assume]]` != `[[clang::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
