On Oct 11, 2012, at 11:11 , Vassil Vassilev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > On 10/11/12 7:21 PM, Jordan Rose wrote: >> I don't know enough about this to make good comments, but rather than have >> "isMultiplex" as the field in Sema, why not call it "isOwned"? That's more >> in line with some of our other delegate-pattern uses, and it keeps it from >> being a temptation to start abusing the field. We could also some day in the >> future allow Sema to take ownership of arbitrary external sources as well, >> though that's clearly not a goal right now. > I agree that Sema should take the ownership it's external source (or at least > we it should be specified with a flag while setting it). For example the > ASTContext owns its ExternalASTSource. > > My original intent was to try to keep the semantics (which is was not trivial > for most of the reimplemented routines) of the existing code and extend it so > that it can fit to our use case. > > Otherwise I agree and I will rename the flag if we decide to keep it… Ah, I see…the MultiplexExternalSource doesn't combine 2 sources, it combines N sources, and so addExternalSource needs to know if there's already a multiplex source in place. Okay, I see your point; keeping the flag as "isMultiplex" is fine. Jordan _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
