smeenai added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D27387#711866, @EricWF wrote:
> This LGTM, but I have a question: Should we add these dylib definitions right > away so that it's easier to adopt the ABI change in future? This will allow > legacy dylibs to support this ABI change in future. If you agree we can make > that change as a follow up commit. As in, leave the header as-is, but make the definitions in `functional.cpp` unconditional? I'm fine with that. https://reviews.llvm.org/D27387 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
