On 03/07/2014 01:40 PM, Aaron Ballman wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Tobias Grosser <[email protected]> wrote:
On 03/07/2014 12:45 AM, Aaron Ballman wrote:
Author: aaronballman
Date: Thu Mar 6 17:45:36 2014
New Revision: 203179
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=203179&view=rev
Log:
[C++11] Replacing iterators redecls_begin() and redecls_end() with
iterator_range redecls(). Updating all of the usages of the iterators with
range-based for loops, which allows the begin/end forms to be removed
entirely.
Hi Aaron,
I wonder if you could use 'auto const &' in some of these cases?
http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#beware-unnecessary-copies-with-auto
I'll look into it once I've gotten the build bots green again. Thank
you for the reminder. :-)
I looked into this a bit more, and I'm not certain there's any real
benefit. Everything returned from these containers is already a
pointer, so this would change them from const Decl * to const Decl *&,
which doesn't strike me as any better (or worse). So I am thinking I
will continue without the const auto & in these cases (and as I move
other pointer-based ranges forward), but thank you for the reminder!
Hi Aaron,
I follow your reasoning. It seems the coding standards are formulated a
little to strictly. Duncan, would it make sense to put an exception
for cases like this into the standard. It seems to be a very common case
in fact.
Tobias
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
