azabaznov added a comment. My main idea was to provide an interface which will not make users to specify `-cl-ext=+__opencl_c_fp64,+cl_khr_fp64`/ `-cl-ext=-__opencl_c_fp64,-cl_khr_fp64` if they need to enable/disable functionality in OpenCL C 3.0 because I believe that is not a right thing to do: why anyone should care about those extensions if there are features already? Also, this may lead to confusions since, for example, `__opencl_c_subgroups` and `cl_khr_subgroups `are not the same (subgroup independent forward progress is required in extension while it is optional in OpenCL C 3.0, thus implementation may support the extension but not the feature).
To be clear: I'm OK with providing a validation of correct option settings (`__opencl_c_fp64/cl_khr_fp64` and `__opencl_c_3d_image_writes/cl_khr_3d_image_writes` should both be set to the same value). Also, it makes sense to unify a check within header and clang to the only macro, I'm OK with that too. But I would prefer to keep the option interface without redundant mentioning of extension. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D96524/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D96524 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
