shafik wrote: > Was there an RFC asking the community about exposing lambdas in pre C++11 > modes? This is a sufficiently large language extension that we probably > should verify if we haven't already. I believe this is a conforming extension > (I can't think of a circumstance under which we'd take correct C++98 code and > treat it differently), but I don't think it's as simple as you've done here. > For example, `noexcept` is a C++11-ism and can appear on a lambda. > `constexpr` as well, trailing return types, etc. So we'd need a better > understanding of what features of lambdas you intend to enable and just how > much of the syntax you expect to work in older modes.
Also generic lambdas is probably a big one to think about as well. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73376 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
