tyler.nowicki added a comment. In D69088#1713648 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088#1713648>, @Meinersbur wrote:
> In D69088#1713623 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088#1713623>, @hsaito wrote: > > > @Meinersbur, if I remember correctly, there was an RFC discussion on this > > topic, right? If yes, would you post the pointer to that? I need a > > refresher on what has been discussed/settled in the past. > > > https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2018-May/058141.html Sorry if this is answered in the patches but what happens if a loop has both #pragma clang loop and transform defined before it? I guess it probably shouldn't work. Perhaps instead you could create a new option to indicate that the order should be respected. #pragma clang loop respect_order <- optionally with (true) or (false) That approach would avoid the inevitable conflicts of having both loop and transform pragmas on the same loop. (Sorry if you received this twice) Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
