On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Christopher Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > This patch is pretty small and probably doesn't have much impact, but it's > my first one and I mainly want to make sure I have the workflow down. I'd > appreciate any criticism. > > This is a first attempt at the StringRef-ization open project. If anyone > has any recommendations on which parts of the interface would be most useful > to start on, I'd appreciate it.
There's probably more value in changing parameter types rather than return types. (& I'd say there's probably more immediate value in ArrayRef-ization than StringRef-ization, maybe - especially in call sites that are passing magic constant "array size" parameters (some of these were just recently fixed in LLVM, for example), but for StringRefization, the value is in updating API/usage that may currently accept a "const std::string&" but never actually needs a string object (because both the caller passes in non-std::strings (string literals, for example) and the implementation doesn't use complex std::string operations)) > Otherwise, I'll do something of a random > walk through the code. Some of the code you've updated will leade to dangling StringRefs - several of the RewriteFilename functions return local variables - they will go out of scope at the end of the function & the caller will be left with a dangling StringRef. That's no good. > > Thanks, > Chris > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits > _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
