On Jun 13, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Douglas Gregor wrote: >> Nice, thanks for landing this Doug. >> >> Some random comments: >> >> 1. Should this have a __has_feature check? >> >> 2. Should the dox in the manual mention >> -f[no-]objc-infer-related-result-type? > > IMO, "no" to both… this is meant to be an evolutionary step for the language, > and the flags are really just there in case we run into trouble and need to > back off on these changes. We've not yet seen any need for these flags, and > they may go away in the future if we continue to see no need for them.
Ok, I thought you were going to publicize the option, if it goes away in the future, then I agree with you here. I also can't think of a reason to use the check. Is there any reason not to remove the flag now? :) >> 4. Why add the RelatedResultType bit to ObjCMethodDecl? Isn't it always >> determinable from the selector? > > > Not always. We also check for type compatibility between the > explicitly-specified result type and the type associated with the context of > the method (e.g., the class if it's in an interface/category/class > extension/implementation/category implementation). It's a bit more work than > I'd like to do in the AST itself. Ok! Thanks Doug, -Chris _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
