[PATCH] D131942: [clang][Interp] Implement bool and nullptr literal expressions

[Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

aaron.ballman added a comment.

In D131942#3729379 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131942#3729379>, @tbaeder wrote:

> In D131942#3729057 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131942#3729057>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
>
>> In D131942#3728994 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131942#3728994>, @erichkeane wrote:
>>
>>> In D131942#3728974 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131942#3728974>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
>>>
>>>> LGTM as well; should we add a release note for this? I suspect not because it's improving an experimental feature that's not really ready for prime time yet, but I don't know how others feel.
>>>
>>> That was my thought on it, though thinking further, I wonder if there is value to it to show 'signs of life' in the release notes?
>>
>> @tbaeder -- do you have plans to continue to add support to the experimental constant expression evaluator?
>>
>> If this is code that we have people actively working on with plans to bring it to completion, then I think showing signs of life in the release notes is a good idea. If we don't have anyone who is planning to bring this through to completion, I think we should seriously considering pulling it out of the tree rather than trying to maintain parallel constant expression evaluators. (We wouldn't be pulling it out of the tree because we don't like the design, so if someone wanted to resurrect it in the future because they planned to complete it, we'd gladly welcome it.)
>
> I certainly plan to keep working on it. I have a few more such patches locally that you'll have pleasure reviewing I'm sure :). It think adding a small changelog note is fine of course.

Fantastic! As long as it's heading in the right direction rather than getting more and more stale, I'm happy to keep it in-tree. I'm fine either way on the release note.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D131942/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D131942