aaron.ballman added a comment. In D119136#3462570 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D119136#3462570>, @MaskRay wrote:
> Sorry but I've reverted this patch and all its fixups in > c79e6007edef4b0044be93c4ffff64dc806ac687 > <https://reviews.llvm.org/rGc79e6007edef4b0044be93c4ffff64dc806ac687> and > 0f5dbfd29ae0df215a01aff80d29255bb799fed0 > <https://reviews.llvm.org/rG0f5dbfd29ae0df215a01aff80d29255bb799fed0> . > See https://reviews.llvm.org/D123909#3461716 for another case not considered. Please double check with the patch author and reviewers before unilaterally reverting multiple commits with no notice and no failing build bots. I do not see a valid justification for these reverts -- the concerns have been true positives so far (or have generated core issues that WG21 is still discussing), and @cor3ntin has been highly responsive with addressing the fallout. This is a significant amount of churn that I don't think should have happened. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D119136/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D119136 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
