alexfh added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D44765#1045394, @Typz wrote:
> A generic (or at least extandable) approach to specifying macro behaviors was > introduced here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33440 I believe, that patch solves a significantly different problem and it won't make it much easier to implement correct handling of _T(x)-like macros (which expand to either x or L ## x depending on some other macro and thus have to be repeated for each fragment of the string literal after splitting). The most extensible solution I see is to make the list of _T-like macro spellings configurable via an option. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D44765 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
