bozicrHT wrote:
> > > > > > But I'm not sure what we could use reasonably.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We could replace it w/ e.g. `*` and add a note along the lines of
> > > > > ‘where `*` is any integer/index/whatever it’s actually supposed to be’
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Asterisk seems pretty overloaded here... maybe the same except with
> > > > `{num}` or something like that?
> > >
> > >
> > > What about using two letters, e.g., `"nn"`, to mark `nonnull`?
> >
> >
> > I experimented with using `"nn"` as the marker for builtin nonnull, but
> > that caused 137 test failures (in SemaHLSL, SemaSPIRV, CodeGenSPIRV,
> > CodeGenHLSL, etc.). Using `"{null}"` reduced it to 3 failing tests:
> > ```
> > Clang :: CodeGen/AArch64/strictfp-builtins.c
> > Clang :: CodeGen/X86/strictfp_builtins.c
> > Clang :: CodeGen/strictfp_builtins.c
> > ```
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The most stable option so far is **`"NN"`**, where all tests pass.
>
> Ah, I was not suggesting we switch the `N` away from null, I'm not sure it is
> a particularly good idea to have ONE be 2 characters, particularly with how
> it is parsed. I am afraid that above, all you did is test the thoroughness of
> our testing :)
>
> I was suggesting the `{num}` or whatever for the cases where the
> documentation is currently using `N` to mean `some random number`.
Ahh sorry for misunderstanding. :)
Yes, I was just testing how the existing tests reacted to changing the marker,
since my custom tests for this feature already passed. Thanks for clarifying. I
can add something like this:
```
// C<{num},M_0,...,M_k> -> callback behavior: argument {num} is called with
// argument M_0, ..., M_k as payload
// s:{num}: -> this is a scanf-like function whose {num}th argument is the
// format string
```
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/160080
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
