On Apr 24, 2013, at 12:26 AM, Nikola Smiljanic <[email protected]> wrote:

> But won't you have to change this code if you change the docs to say "returns 
> zero if the set contains the specified cursor"
> 
>  CXCursorSet_Impl *setImpl = unpackCXCursorSet(set);
>   if (!setImpl)
>     return 0;
> 
> ???

True, but the behavior is weird.  If we have an invalid CXCursorSet, it means 
that it contains any cursor.  That just seems wrong.  I'd rather fix the API 
than perpetuate the breakage.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to