Re: r333082 - Fix duplicate class template definitions problem

Thanks a lot! Gabor On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:54 PM Hans Wennborg wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Gabor Marton via cfe-commits > wrote: > > Author: martong > > Date: Wed May 23 06:53:36 2018 > > New Revision: 333082 > > > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=333082&view=re

Re: r352055 - Fix failing buildbots

Hi, Thank you for catching this. I thought that the macros like __x86_64__ are defined for the target. I just don't understand: If they are defined for the host, that would mean we can't cross compile on the same host for different targets, wouldn't it? I couldn't find out which macros to use to

Re: r352055 - Fix failing buildbots

Dave, The idea to check explicitly the triple inside the test function is quite convincing. Will you try to fix it that way? Or if it can wait a bit, this will be my first thing to do on Monday. Gábor On Fri, 1 Feb 2019, 19:39 David Green Hello > > > I think, because this is a unit-test, the co

Re: r352055 - Fix failing buildbots

Thank you for taking care of this! As I see now the hexagon build bot is happy and the other bots too. Thanks again, Gábor On Sat, 2 Feb 2019, 09:34 David Green Sounds good to me, easy enough for me to test here. And I'll count that as > a review. > > > I've given it a try in rC352956. We can se

Re: [PATCH] D66951: [ASTImporter] Add comprehensive tests for ODR violation handling strategies

Thanks, for reaching out to me. I am looking into it. Gabor On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 5:44 PM Simon Pilgrim via Phabricator < revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > RKSimon added a comment. > > @martong This is failing on windows buildbots: > http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/llvm-clang-x86_64-expens

Re: r335491 - Revert "[ASTImporter] Import the whole redecl chain of functions"

Hi Nico, Yes, I reverted because it broke one of the lldb build bots. Next time I'll include the reason in the revert commit. Gábor On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, 22:50 Nico Weber, wrote: > When reverting things, please say why in the commit message. (In this > case, apparently because it broke the lld

Re: [PATCH] D86874: [analyzer] Fix ArrayBoundCheckerV2 false positive regarding size_t indexer

Hi Balázs, Since reviews.llvm.org is offline, I am sending my comments below, inline. Thanks for your huge effort in explaining all this! Overall, I have a feeling that this approach targets only one specific case, which is fine. But I believe we should think about all the other possible cases, s