On Thu Aug 21 2014 at 3:54:28 PM Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Manuel Klimek <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu Aug 21 2014 at 3:37:22 PM Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Manuel Klimek <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > +richard, since this is now touching lib/Basic... > >> > > >> > Looks good to me, but I want Richard to take a look whether this makes > >> > sense or should be solved differently. > >> > >> I am confused as to why the solution switched away from using the > >> AttrKind enum value and is now using a string. > > > > > > Note that the string is only for the dynamic matchers - the normal C++ > > matchers still use the enum. > > I hadn't noticed that; thank you for pointing it out! But at the risk > of demonstrating my ignorance, I guess I still don't understand why > the string is an improvement. AttrKinds.h is in Basic, so it's > available everywhere. > I'm not sure what you mean - for the dynamic matchers we definitely need to be able to construct them from a string... > > ~Aaron >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
