jwakely added a comment. In D87974#2436169 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D87974#2436169>, @BillyONeal wrote:
> The name MSFT is already shipping in production is > `__builtin_zero_non_value_bits`. If gcc is already shipping another name in > production I think clang is stuck supporting both names, if gcc has not yet > shipped their implementation perhaps we can choose one. That seems to be more > on gcc than it is on clang given clang's desire to be more or less a drop in > replacement for either gcc or msvc. Are they actually the same, with the same handling of corner cases like unions and tail padding? There's more to this than just the name, and if they aren't the same, it seems better to have two names. Is there a specification for `__builtin_zero_non_value_bits` available somewhere? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87974/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87974 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
