Author: Ye Luo
Date: 2023-02-14T15:48:38-06:00
New Revision: 0d4e55ba69c1dd04913c59d39c764c8070e55c60
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/0d4e55ba69c1dd04913c59d39c764c8070e55c60
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/0d4e55ba69c1dd04913c59d39c764c8070e55c60.diff
LOG: [
ye-luo wrote:
> Are we still releasing 19?
yes. Point releases 19.1.x
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/115944
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-
ye-luo wrote:
> Just to double-check assumptions -- we don't know of any builtins which Clang
> now reports true for which Clang does not actually support? And we don't know
> of any builtins which Clang now reports false for which Clang does actually
> support? IOW, `__has_builtin` is not lyi
ye-luo wrote:
This change breaks use of llvm 19.1.2 and 19.1.3
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/113125
Can it be reverted on the release branch?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111660
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-br
ye-luo wrote:
I tried __reference_converts_from_temporary https://godbolt.org/z/TPjbqWT67
18.1.0, 19.1.0 both return false
19.1.2 and main returns true.
I have no issue with __has_builtin fixed in the main but the resulted behavior
change in a point release is a bit trouble some.
https://github
ye-luo wrote:
> Hmm. Is this really a regression? Which is what we usually only fix at this
> point. It seems like a "feature". What's the risk of this creating problems
> for users already adopted 19.x?
It is not a regression but a bug fix. The issue has been there for years. NVHPC
ships the
ye-luo wrote:
I manually verified the effectiveness of this patch on 20.x release branch.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/138626
___
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
