ravurvi20 wrote: > Thank you for this patch. I wonder: was this spelling change introduced in > 5.2? If so, does the compiler after this patch still support the 5.1 spelling > when providing this as the OpenMP version (`-fopenmp-version=5.1`)
Yes, otherwise clause was introduced in OpenMP 5.2 version ([Metadirective](https://www.openmp.org/spec-html/5.2/openmpse45.html)). I have added a condition where, for OpenMP 5.2 or later, the compiler generates a warning for the default clause, while for OpenMP 5.1 and earlier, the default clause is accepted without warnings. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125648 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
