reames added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: jeroen.dobbelaere. @nikic ping on previous question. It's been a month, and this has been LGTMed. Without response, I plan to land this.
In D110745#3038848 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D110745#3038848>, @xbolva00 wrote: > This really needs to be properly benchmarked. This has been benchmarked on every workload I care about, and shows no interesting regressions. Unfortunately, those are all non-public Java workloads, On the C/C++ side, I don't have a ready environment in which to run anything representative. From the semantic change, I wouldn't expect C++ to show much difference, and besides, this is fixing a long standing fairly major correctness issue. If you have particular suites you care about, please run them and share results. At this point, I strongly lean towards committing and letting regressions be reported. We might revert, or we might simply fix forward depending on what comes up Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D110745/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D110745 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
