rsmith added a comment. In D59038#1422905 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D59038#1422905>, @hans wrote:
> In D59038#1422890 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D59038#1422890>, @rsmith wrote: > > > LGTM, and I think this is safe enough to take for Clang 8. > > > Do you think the severity is high enough to spin another release candidate? Given that the regression breaks both libstdc++ >=7 and abseil, I'm inclined to say yes. (Either that or we should aim to release a fixed 7.0.1 as soon as feasible after 7). Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59038/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59038 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
