================
Comment at:
google3/third_party/llvm/llvm/tools/clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchersInternal.h:126-128
@@ +125,5 @@
+/// @{
+NODE_BASE_TYPE_UTIL(Decl);
+NODE_BASE_TYPE_UTIL(Stmt);
+NODE_BASE_TYPE_UTIL(QualType);
+/// @}
----------------
Michael Diamond wrote:
> Daniel Jasper wrote:
> > It is very important that this list is in sync with the enum declaring
> > NT_*. Ideally, we would not need both, but if we do, could we put the right
> > next to each other in the code?
> Unfortunately, no. We require NodeBaseType in the definition of
> NodeBaseTypeUtil. I've added a comment to the enum to update both get
> _base_type and the list of specializations.
But you could define NodeBaseUtilType before the enum if you define
NodeBaseTypeUtil::getNodeBaseType() out of line below the NODE_BASE_TYPE_UTIL
macro invocations.
So I am suggesting the order:
#define GET_BASE_TYPE...
struct NodeBaseTypeUtil {
... static NodeBaseType getNodeBaseType(); ...
};
#define NODE_BASE_TYPE_UTIL...
enum NodeBaseType {...};
struct get_base_type {...};
NODE_BASE_TYPE_UTIL(Decl);...
NodeBaseType NodeBaseTypeUtil::getNodeBaseType() {
...
}
Not feeling strongly, though..
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D25
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
