rapidsna wrote: > One possibility would be to use a type qualifier? It has basically the kind > of properties you want... the underlying type is > still there, and places > that strip qualifiers will automatically do the right thing in a lot of > cases. It might require a bit more > work to handle it in various places in > semantic analysis, though.
Thanks @efriedma-quic! We also thought about using qualifiers before but it's tricky because we would like the bounds annotations to be able to apply to function return types and parameters. WDYT? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78000 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
