[PATCH] D69088: [Lex] #pragma clang transform

[Michael Kruse via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

Meinersbur added a comment.

In D69088#1715038 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088#1715038>, @hsaito wrote:

> If there is a precedence, just follow that. Else, how to spell an experimental clang pragma would be a good discussion topic by itself. If I need to provide a discussion starter, I'd say how about transform_experimental instead of transform. All I ask is somehow make it easier for programmers to know it is experimental so that they won't use it w/o first reading about the current state of support. I don't have a strong opinion about how to do so.


The precedences I have found are `-fexperimental-pass-manager`, `-fexperimental-isel`, `std::experimental` and `clang-cl /openmp:experimental`, Modules <https://releases.llvm.org/3.5.0/tools/clang/docs/Modules.html> and a couple of features only mentioning "experimental" in their commit log.

I dislike changing the syntax syntax as it means that we will at one point break already written code or have to maintain two spellings. I'd rather just enable them with a command-line switch, such as `-fexperimental-transform`.


Repository:
  rC Clang

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D69088