You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Tracking issue for MCP 994: Add -Zllvm-target-feature target *modifier* to directly set LLVM-level target features, and deprecate doing that with -Ctarget-feature #157753
This is a tracking issue for MCP "Add -Zllvm-target-feature target modifier to directly set LLVM-level target features, and deprecate doing that with -Ctarget-feature" (rust-lang/compiler-team#994).
Note
Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter, link to this tracking issue and ping the MCP author.
Alternatively, post in the Zulip stream linked from the MCP.
Discussion comments will get marked as off-topic or deleted.
Repeated discussions on the tracking issue may lead to the tracking issue getting locked.
This is a tracking issue for MCP "Add
-Zllvm-target-featuretarget modifier to directly set LLVM-level target features, and deprecate doing that with-Ctarget-feature" (rust-lang/compiler-team#994).Note
Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter, link to this tracking issue and ping the MCP author.
Alternatively, post in the Zulip stream linked from the MCP.
Discussion comments will get marked as off-topic or deleted.
Repeated discussions on the tracking issue may lead to the tracking issue getting locked.
Steps
Unresolved questions
None so far.
Implementation history
Empty so far.
@RalfJung, consider
@rustbot claim'ing the work.