brooksmoses added a comment. In D99790#2678674 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D99790#2678674>, @lebedev.ri wrote:
> In D99790#2678384 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D99790#2678384>, @brooksmoses > wrote: > >> In any case, thanks for the quick reply, and I'll figure out a small >> reproducer if we find something that isn't UB. > > Nono, you misunderstand, i want the samples *with* UB. > I will then revert this, and add UBSan check to catch that UB first. Oh! Okay, will do. Do you still want the samples even if UBSan catches them? Meanwhile, would you be open to providing a gating flag to turn this off, so we can roll it out generally while turning it off for the specific things that have issues until we can fix them? So far, what we're finding is caught by UBSan but not very trivial to fix. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D99790/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D99790 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
