On Mar 7, 2012, at 6:33 PM, John McCall wrote:
> On Feb 22, 2012, at 9:32 AM, Douglas Gregor wrote:
>> Author: dgregor
>> Date: Wed Feb 22 11:32:19 2012
>> New Revision: 151170
>>
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=151170&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Teach overload resolution to prefer user-defined conversion via a
>> lambda closure type's function pointer conversion over user-defined
>> conversion via a lambda closure type's block pointer conversion,
>> always. This is a preference for more-standard code (since blocks
>> are an extension) and a nod to efficiency, since function pointers
>> don't require any memory management. Fixes PR12063.
>
> Why does this have anything to do with Objective-C?
> Blocks are a C extension.
The memory-management model for the conversion to block pointer is
retain+autorelease. Since we don't have an 'autorelease' equivalent in
C-with-blocks, we opted to omit the block pointer conversion rather than invent
another memory-management scheme.
Yes, we could probably come up with another solution, but IMO the user base for
C++11-with-blocks-and-lambdas that isn't Objective-C++11 is too small to bother
inventing something now.
- Doug
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
