On Jun 29, 2012, at 2:29 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Manuel Klimek <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Douglas Gregor <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> CamelCase is fine for these. I notice that there's some inconsistency with >>> 'has' names, e.g., hasDescendant vs. HasType. >> >> >> Update: Chandler voted for using llvm coding style (and I agree). The >> argument is that the callable classes we have are just classes to work >> around missing variadic templates and that they will become functions anyway >> once we get C++11 into llvm (in a future, far, far away). > > Actually - this is a layer on top of Clang the compiler, so why > wouldn't it just use C++11? It doesn't have the same constraints of > buildability with host compilers as the compiler does - you can always > just compile this with Clang. Our support for generating code on Windows is still too poor to make this something we depend on. Unless someone has a Tool that maps variadic templates down to C++03 ;) - Doug _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
