4.0.1 it is. Thanks Hans!
/Eric
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> We're at the "should have tagged 'final' days ago" stage :-)
>
> Since it's not a regression, I would prefer not to merge it unless you
> feel super strongly about it.
>
> Sounds like a good candidate for 4.
We're at the "should have tagged 'final' days ago" stage :-)
Since it's not a regression, I would prefer not to merge it unless you
feel super strongly about it.
Sounds like a good candidate for 4.0.1 (tracking bug is PR32061).
Thanks,
Hans
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:36 AM, Eric Fiselier wrote:
@Hans Where are we in the release process? I would like to merge this into
4.0.
Although it's not a regression, it is a significant bug. This patch fixes
the bug by
forwarding to a compiler builtin, which is strictly better than what we
have. I'm
confident this patch is safe.
/Eric
On Tue, Feb 2
Author: ericwf
Date: Tue Feb 28 19:27:14 2017
New Revision: 296561
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=296561&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR32097 - is_abstract doesn't work on class templates.
This patch fixes llvm.org/PR32097 by using the __is_abstract
builtin type-trait instead of the previous l
