aaron.ballman added a comment. In D124434#3479051 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D124434#3479051>, @junaire wrote:
>> In general, my concern with the this patch is that it loses test coverage by >> specifying an explicit language mode. We typically prefer to fix the tests >> so that they can work in any language mode (and perhaps add additional RUN >> lines in the process to do so). > > OK, I'll do this. But I guess it is not sort of trivial work and will take > plenty of time. Oh, please do not feel obligated to do that work yourself! Not only is it nontrivial and likely to take a fair amount of effort, I'm not even certain if other people think it's a good idea or not. I see this more as a start of a discussion as to how we want to handle this. I think when C and C++ were on 10+ year release cycles, this model was a bit more palatable, but now that the releases are shorter (every 3 yrs for C++ at the least) and there's more interplay between them (extensions ported to older language modes, etc) we might want something different. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D124434/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D124434 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
