erichkeane wrote: > > Would it be reasonable to add a > > `-Wno-deprecated-relaxed-template-template-args` flag (or something like > > that) for this specific deprecation? > > I had similar idea, but what about instead implementing something generic to > ignore deprecation of any driver flag?
I think I prefer pretty fine-grained ones TBH, it makes our deprecation warnings more valuable. In a perfect world, it would change every release of the compiler so that folks would be frequently reminded of it, but it isn't a perfect world :) > Does it sound good for everyone that we revert the deprecation of the > negative spelling of the flag for a while, until we come up with a patch for > a new flag which helps ignore these deprecations? Is doing so much of a task? I would expect it to be like other diagnostics and take roughly the same amount of time as reverting the negative-spelling-deprecation. I don't see the request to remove the deprecation (it IS just a warning afterall!) to be particularly motivating until release time (it IS just a warning afterall!), so I'd think it would a better spending of time to implement what Richard suggested. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89807 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
