[PATCH] D50913: [FPEnv] Don't need copysign/fabs/fneg constrained intrinsics

[Andy Kaylor via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

andrew.w.kaylor added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D50913#1245120, @cameron.mcinally wrote:

> There hasn't been any strong objects, but I haven't seen many strong accepts either besides the few main stakeholders. I'm under the assumption that silence is a passive reject in situations like this.
>
> Should I keep pushing for it? It felt like I was beating a dead horse...


It's hard to interpret silence sometimes, but my experience has been that this community is rarely passive about rejection. I think there are good reasons to make another attempt at moving forward with the fneg instruction.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D50913