[llvm-branch-commits] [cfe-branch] r323179 - [ReleaseNotes] Mention OpenMP Tools Interface in runtime library

Author: hahnfeld Date: Mon Jan 22 23:50:11 2018 New Revision: 323179 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=323179&view=rev Log: [ReleaseNotes] Mention OpenMP Tools Interface in runtime library The OpenMP runtime has no dedicated Release Notes, so add it to Clang's section about OpenMP. Di

[llvm-branch-commits] [cfe-branch] r323128 - Merging r323123:

Author: hahnfeld Date: Mon Jan 22 07:38:26 2018 New Revision: 323128 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=323128&view=rev Log: Merging r323123: r323123 | hahnfeld | 2018-01-22 16:27:45 +0100 (Mon, 22 Jan 2018) | 6 lin

[llvm-branch-commits] [cfe-branch] r323066 - [docs] Fix typo in Release Notes

Author: hahnfeld Date: Sun Jan 21 03:43:32 2018 New Revision: 323066 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=323066&view=rev Log: [docs] Fix typo in Release Notes Modified: cfe/branches/release_60/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst Modified: cfe/branches/release_60/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst URL: http:/

Re: [llvm-branch-commits] [cfe-branch] r323179 - [ReleaseNotes] Mention OpenMP Tools Interface in runtime library

, Jan 23, 2018 at 8:50 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld via llvm-branch-commits wrote: Author: hahnfeld Date: Mon Jan 22 23:50:11 2018 New Revision: 323179 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=323179&view=rev [1] Log: [ReleaseNotes] Mention OpenMP Tools Interface in runtime library The OpenMP ru

Re: [llvm-branch-commits] [cfe-branch] r323179 - [ReleaseNotes] Mention OpenMP Tools Interface in runtime library

actually work on Windows. Should we update the text? On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 8:50 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld via llvm-branch-commits wrote: Author: hahnfeld Date: Mon Jan 22 23:50:11 2018 New Revision: 323179 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=323179&view=rev [1] [1] Log: [ReleaseNotes] Me

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] 6e890ec - [CMake] Avoid __FakeVCSRevision.h with no git repository

Author: Jonas Hahnfeld Date: 2020-12-16T17:33:20+01:00 New Revision: 6e890ec7beb0874464a0af9f84e41a987f968b23 URL: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/6e890ec7beb0874464a0af9f84e41a987f968b23 DIFF: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/6e890ec7beb0874464a0af9f84e41a987f968b23.diff

[llvm-branch-commits] [clang] release/20.x: [clang] Forward TPL of NestedNameSpecifier (PR #137806)

hahnjo wrote: Hi @shafik, the issue is an inconsistency in the treatment of template specialization types depending on whether they are the prefix or the "final" type. To stay with the example of the test, the result without this patch is `A<1>` and `A<2>`, but `A<1U>::B<3>` and `A<2U>::B<4>`.

[llvm-branch-commits] [clang] release/20.x: [clang] Forward TPL of NestedNameSpecifier (PR #137806)

https://github.com/hahnjo milestoned https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137806 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits

[llvm-branch-commits] [clang] release/20.x: [clang] Forward TPL of NestedNameSpecifier (PR #137806)

https://github.com/hahnjo created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137806 This avoids type suffixes for integer constants when the type can be inferred from the template parameter, such as the `unsigned` parameter of `A<1>` and `A<2>` in the added test. --- Note: This issue does not

[llvm-branch-commits] [clang] release/20.x: [clang] Forward TPL of NestedNameSpecifier (PR #137806)

hahnjo wrote: @shafik do the explanations make sense? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137806 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits