On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 05:43:22PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > Ah sorry, that should definitely be >= :( > > That is what I get for writing an email that late... in reality, it probably > won't matter due to the availability of 11.0.1 and 11.1.0 but it should > absolutely be changed. > I have not given Nick's patch a go yet but would something like this be > acceptable? If so, did you want me to send a formal fixup patch or did you > want to send a v4? I have no personal preference. I think fixup patch patch will be better as we can undo it later. I don't think Nick's patch is needed because that code is not related with clang version, and we don't need that code even in clang 10. then is there something I can help for now? thanks, Hyeonggon
