Meinersbur added a comment. In D69088#1715038 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088#1715038>, @hsaito wrote:
> If there is a precedence, just follow that. Else, how to spell an > experimental clang pragma would be a good discussion topic by itself. If I > need to provide a discussion starter, I'd say how about > transform_experimental instead of transform. All I ask is somehow make it > easier for programmers to know it is experimental so that they won't use it > w/o first reading about the current state of support. I don't have a strong > opinion about how to do so. The precedences I have found are `-fexperimental-pass-manager`, `-fexperimental-isel`, `std::experimental` and `clang-cl /openmp:experimental`, Modules <https://releases.llvm.org/3.5.0/tools/clang/docs/Modules.html> and a couple of features only mentioning "experimental" in their commit log. I dislike changing the syntax syntax as it means that we will at one point break already written code or have to maintain two spellings. I'd rather just enable them with a command-line switch, such as `-fexperimental-transform`. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
