Thanks @Mordante !

Hey @Mordante , Sorry for it! I'm not sure how to close it manually, I tried Add Action here but I cannot see any option for Closing the revision ?

Thanks @Mordante , updated!

Hey @ldionne, Here is the follow up revision https://reviews.llvm.org/D145087

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/813e1da9749a5d2d604198cf534f750c842eda22 , commited by me only!

cool, Thanks!

Hey @philnik , I'm not sure about, can we land this now?

Hey @fsb4000 @ldionne , Let me know if it's fine to commit this. I'll do it. Thanks!

In D135248#4135268, @fsb4000 wrote:

patch application failed

How did you create your diff?
I create my diffs like this:

git diff -U999999 main > 1.txt

and then I upload 1.txt

Thanks @fsb4000

for ignoring the whitespace changes used git diff -b that's why it's failing for now but will change it once you review the basic structure of the patch

Hey @philnik , sorry for the format changes but this is what i can do best for now , not sure about the removing all the format changes!

For an update on the patch, this patch is currently for _LIBCPP_STD_VER > 20 , and tests cases fixed accordingly to pass the CI , if there is anything that needs to be change, let me know!

It still failing on the ranges.min.max.pass.cpp, we need to guard that too for passing the CI. Or Is there any other work around?

Correctly places the macros.

Hey @EricWF , could you please take a look at this patch, i guess there are some tests which got affected by this . I'm not sure if i need to update them for passing the CI?

update the revision with few changes for the correct version

rebase the changes on top of main

Hey @ldionne Thanks for quick response, I'd squash it here https://reviews.llvm.org/D136356 .

Hey @philnik , could you please review this patch instead of the previous one?

Updating the patch after rebasing

Re-uploading the patch

Hey @philnik , could you tell me about the tests? does changes in the type.pass.cpp looks correct? Although I tried running the test using llvm-lit but got the failure on iterator_concept_conformance.compile.pass.cpp and type.pass.cpp.

I'm not sure about, where to look for testing of it or need to create new tests ?

In D125340#3506210, @balazske wrote:

I found one other place in LibASTImporter.rst where ImportError is used. LLDB should be checked too.

In D125340#3505723, @martong wrote:

What are the benefits of this renaming? I mean is there a name clash? Do we have another kind of "import" in Clang or in some of the dependent projects, don't we?

In D120489#3493313, @martong wrote:

Maybe it is not too late to update the clang/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst? A new checker is certainly important for the users. Many thanks!

Thanks @martong @balazske for the Review .

Rebase several commits

is there still any problem ? I'm not sure ?

address the buildbot failing issue

Correct the number of character in line 1

In D124774#3493382, @phyBrackets wrote:

I'm having a problem , this patch expected to address the previous inline comment but after making the specific change and committing it , when I'm creating the patch using arc diff --update <revisionId> , the changes were suddenly gone and I thought that maybe the changes were there in the commit atleast but I think commit got reverted and there is nothing for diff but suddenly the patch were created .

address inline comment