AaronBallman wrote: > > I'm OK with this kind of change if the AArch64 maintainers are on board. > > @AaronBallman Do you have a strong objection to this PR? > > We don't typically backport _features_ unless there's some strongly > compelling case. This sounds like a nice-to-have but I'm not certain why it > can't wait for Clang 19 (and have more in-tree time to bake), especially > since rc3 is already out the door: > https://llvm.org/docs/HowToReleaseLLVM.html#release-patch-rules
To be clear, I'm not strongly opposed, I'm just trying to understand whether this meets our usual criteria and if it doesn't, what about this situation warrants an exception. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81857 _______________________________________________ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
