xazax.hun added a comment. In D79423#2022812 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D79423#2022812>, @martong wrote:
> I don't think that could be a concern. > Actually, redefinition of a reserved name either in the C or in the C++ > standard library is undefined behavior: I disagree. As you mentioned in another revision, we plan to model functions beyond the C and C++ standard library. We cannot prevent name collisions for those other libraries (and sometimes we cannot even prevent unintended name collisions with the standard libraries). I think to reduce the risk of applying the wrong summary to a function worth the effort of spelling the signature out (since it only needs to be done once). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D79423/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D79423 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
