jrtc27 added a comment. In D109372#3099947 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D109372#3099947>, @edward-jones wrote:
> I reverted some of the previous changes I made so that this patch matches the > spec as currently written - this means it's two attributes again, and the > diagnostic messages have been updated a bit too. The two Clang attributes > match to the same LLVM attribute internally though. > > This is at a stage where more review would be nice. Obviously this is gated > on patches to other toolchain components, but I hope that these changes won't > change too much now unless the spec also changes. The whole point of putting it up for review is so you get feedback about the entire direction of the spec, which was written by people who are not experts when it comes to toolchains. You’re supposed to take our feedback, relay it to them and get the draft spec revised. Otherwise, if the spec written by people who don’t know what makes sense for toolchains is regarded as holy and immutable then I’m just going to NACK this as poorly designed and something LLVM shouldn’t bow to implementing, and you’ve wasted my time asking for a full review. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D109372/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D109372 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
