On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:55 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote: > > * should we consider adding an ArrayRef implicit ctor from "None"? > (see llvm/ADT/None.h and its use in llvm/ADT/Optional.h) Then you > could replace all the "ArrayRef<T>()" calls with "None" (you might > even want to do a sed replace on existing instances of this as a > separate patch (a purely mechanical patch is easy to review/apply)).
What's wrong with `ArrayRef<T>()`? It's explicit and clear. What is the benefit of writing `None` instead? IMHO if I saw "None" that would just confuse me and send me on a wild goose chase that would eventually terminate on finding the implicit ArrayRef ctor and then saying to myself "why the heck didn't they just write `ArrayRef<T>`"? -- Sean Silva
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
