jdenny added a comment. In D106509#2896956 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D106509#2896956>, @jdoerfert wrote:
>> That's fine for me, but don't the routines use llvm_omp_? > > That was before we "standardized" `ompx_` for OpenMP 5.2. Ah. Thanks. >> Should we also have that prefix in various enumerators in the >> implementation? For example, what does OMP_MAP_HOLD become? > > I'd suggest `OMPX_MAP_HOLD` Makes sense. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D106509/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D106509 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
