On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Eric Christopher <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Any reason that we need them in 3.5? Correctness? > > My only concern is that the feature is partially in 3.5, but a > user-facing part of that feature was changed once the freeze happened. > Eg) #pragma clang loop unroll(enable) became #pragma clang loop > unroll(full) > That's my primary concern as well. Having one release with one particular syntax, then switch it to something else for the next release is not great. All-in-all I'd probably prefer not supporting the unroll pragma at all in 3.5 than have a (slightly) buggy one whose syntax will change. However, rolling back support completely would be a bigger change than these patches. Mark > > Then again, I don't imagine this is going to get so much use in the > real world that users can't do a simple grep to refactor their code > for the change. > ~Aaron >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
