On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 8:09 PM, Alp Toker <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> On 22/04/2014 00:31, Alp Toker wrote:
>
>> I'm not really opposed to the idea, though. I just found the current
>>> version easier to use.
>>>
>>
>> I recommend not modifying the Diag() signature because the feature will
>> be unavailable to other modules until they each update their own Diag()
>> signatures introducing latent churn.
>>
>
> To be clear, my concern is that other developers will propagate this over
> time to other Diag() functions as they would have to to be able to use it
> -- a problem that a fluent extension to DiagnosticBuilder wouldn't suffer
> from.
>

No problem. I don't really care what it uses, as long as I can get the
behaviour I want from the system.  I'll change it to use a manipulator, as
you folks agreed downthread.  Patch coming up.


Diego.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to