4ast wrote:

> I think we come to a point where we need to decide if `gotox` is a part of 
> `cpuv4`. If it is, we should keep it disabled by default, to avoid backwards 
> compatibility issues. @4ast , @yonghong-song

it's fine for gotox to be in cpuv4. It will be generated only for large-ish 
switches where backward compat is unlikely to be an issue, and for explicit 
computed goto which would have failed to compile.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/165456
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to