AaronBallman wrote: > We are planning to consume this downstream in the Swift compiler for C++ > interop. Swift has non-escapable types, like Swift's `Span` type. The interop > layer cannot bridge a C++ `std::span` as Swift's `Span` without this > additional information from the API's authors.
Why should this live upstream if it basically only benefits a single downstream? > The need to annotate this property was also raised in > https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-a-clangir-based-safe-c/83245 which was the > main motivation to make this change upstream, to avoid having multiple > different spellings across the parallel efforts to interoperate between safe > and unsafe code. That RFC did not really get much support because CIR isn't anywhere near far enough along to start making plans for it, so it's not really a compelling reason to move forward with these changes yet. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117344 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
