On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> I assume there's an implied "merge to 5.0 branch?" question here :)
Yes :-) I lost that part somehow.
>
> Yes, horrible as lax vector conversions are, we shouldn't accidentally
> regress support for them.
r309770. Thanks.
>
>
> On 1 August
I assume there's an implied "merge to 5.0 branch?" question here :)
Yes, horrible as lax vector conversions are, we shouldn't accidentally
regress support for them.
On 1 August 2017 at 16:28, Hans Wennborg via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Sounds good to me. Richard, what do
Sounds good to me. Richard, what do you think?
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Bruno Cardoso Lopes via cfe-commits
wrote:
> Author: bruno
> Date: Tue Aug 1 12:05:25 2017
> New Revision: 309722
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=309722&view=rev
> Log:
> [Sema] Fix lax conversion be
Author: bruno
Date: Tue Aug 1 12:05:25 2017
New Revision: 309722
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=309722&view=rev
Log:
[Sema] Fix lax conversion between non ext vectors
r282968 introduced a regression due to the lack of proper testing.
Re-add lax conversion support between non ext ve
