[Mlir-commits] [mlir] [mlir][arith] doc updates for ub semantics, and int representations (PR #72932)

[Jacob Yu]

pingshiyu wrote:

> > LGTM. Let's give it a few days for other folks to weight in, especially with Thanksgiving just around the corner.
> 
> In case it's not clear: my comment is clearly blocking. You're misleading the author in thinking that this can be merged here: please be careful in providing explicit conditional approval ("LGTM but please wait for acknowledgement from XYZ").

I see, that's fair enough. Am I correct in understanding that we'd like to leave the overflow behaviour undefined for now, before we figure out if we want to adopt the LLVM-style opt-in poison semantics or now?

Btw, @kuhar in private messages did mention that the approval is conditional since it's a core change, and that we'd like to have a few more opinions on this before merging

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72932