[PATCH] D86233: [WIP] [RFC] [LangRef] Define noprogress attribute

[Ralf via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

RalfJung added a comment.

> This attribute indicates that the function is guaranteed to not make  progress

I don't think this is correct. I think the correct wording is "the function is *permitted* to not make progress, i.e., to run into an infinite loop without side-effects". (Ideally there's a definition of "progress" somewhere that we can reference.)

> There is some appeal in not over-specifying this.

As someone who keeps running into problems where LLVM is underspecified, I don't think "overspecification" is a problem that we have here. ;)


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D86233/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D86233