kelbon wrote:
> There are questions about the name, theorically this is an identifier that c > and c++ committees may want to use in the future. Yes, the name define2 is a placeholder, but the more I look at it, the more it looks appropriate > Is this something you plan to propose to other compilers? Standardization? I dont think standard committee will consider the proposal without reference implementation(if its not a modules ofc)) and, in case of preprocessor, usage in 'real world' > You should also consider whether this needs extensions flags and extension > warnings. > missing unit tests i will research how to do it in llvm https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/65851 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
