On Wed, 29 Sep 2010 10:49:44 -0700, Douglas Gregor <[email protected]>
wrote:
> It's not harmful, so it's okay if it stays in. Hopefully, to be replaced
> with what I described below :)

Yes, using decls_begin/decls_end is the way to go, I don't know what I was
thinking. :) The new patch is attached.

>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Douglas Gregor <[email protected]>
wrote:
>>> It seems like addSubNodes() for a RecordDecl should just visit all
>>> of the nodes in the decls_begin()/decls_end(), printing everything
>>> (which will include fields, member functions, static data members,
>>> etc.). Of course, it could skip "implicit" declarations, so we don't
>>> have to see the injected-class-name.
-- 
Martin

Attachment: all_nested_decls_xml.patch
Description: Binary data

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to