echristo added inline comments.
> spatel wrote in CGCall.cpp:1735 > I'm probably not imagining some use case, but I was hoping that we can just > delete the 4 (fast/inf/nan/nsz) that are already covered by instruction-level > FMF. An auto-upgrade might be needed within LLVM...and/or a big pile of > regression test changes? No, that seems reasonable. I think it makes more sense as a follow-on patch though. https://reviews.llvm.org/D24815 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
