[llvm-commits] [PATCH] Atomic NAND options
dblaikie at gmail.com
Thu Jul 14 12:51:19 CDT 2011
> Yes, I think that is very reasonable. It is a very rare builtin for people
> to use. Having clang warn unconditionally (with a -W flag) seems like the
> right answer.
That sounds like it'd be a little weird/annoying for new use cases, wouldn't
it? (unless the old behavior is the obvious/expected behavior even for new
Is this the sort of thing you'd keep around for one release & then remove
with the following one?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-commits