----- Original Message ----- > On 06/11/2013 10:10, David Majnemer wrote: > > From my experience, > > `SkipUntil(EndKind, /*StopAtSemi=*/true, /*DontConsume=*/true);` > > is more typical in clang than > > `SkipUntil(EndKind, StopAtSemi | DontConsume);` > > > > It seems that some of the calls that you changed were previously > > nasty (i.e. `SkipUntil(EndKind, true, true)`) which justifies a > > cleanup. > > However I'm not sure we want a bitfield here. > > > > What is your justification? > > I like this new SkipUnti(). It's a step in the right direction for > the > parser, and a lot more approachable than the rows of bools. > > The old comments-before-arguments trick was never kept up to date and > too easy to mix up. > > Small nitpick, The names of DontConsume and NoSkipUntilFlags are a > bit > jarring (maybe NoConsume would do for the first one?)
I agree. Also, can you please invert the sense of the StopAtSemi option so that 0 can be the default. That way we never need 'NoSkipUntilFlags' in the code. -Hal > > Alp. > > > > > > > > ================ > > Comment at: include/clang/Parse/Parser.h:751 > > @@ -741,3 +750,3 @@ > > /// token will ever occur, this skips to the next token, or to > > some likely > > - /// good stopping point. If StopAtSemi is true, skipping will > > stop at a ';' > > - /// character. > > + /// good stopping point. If Flags has bit set at StopAtSemi, > > skipping will > > + /// stop at a ';' character. > > ---------------- > > The wording "has bit set" seems strange. > > > > > > http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2108 > > _______________________________________________ > > cfe-commits mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits > > -- > http://www.nuanti.com > the browser experts > > -- Hal Finkel Assistant Computational Scientist Leadership Computing Facility Argonne National Laboratory _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
