Yes, I actually like that this unifies the "namespace" for the bound nodes. I'm still slightly torn on the complexity vs. usefulness trade-off, but I think this proposal wins.
================ Comment at: google3/third_party/llvm/llvm/tools/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.h:88 @@ +87,3 @@ +/// We use template specialization on the node base type to enable us to +/// get at the appropriate NodeBaseType objects and do approrpiate static_casts. +template <typename BaseType> ---------------- appropriate http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D25 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
