On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 1:08 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 7:26 AM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Author: aaronballman >>> Date: Wed Apr 23 09:26:59 2014 >>> New Revision: 206986 >>> >>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=206986&view=rev >>> Log: >>> Replacing a naked pointer with a unique_ptr. No functional changes intended. >> >> Any particular reason this needs to be dynamically allocated (it >> doesn't appear to be polymorphic - but perhaps it will be in the >> future?)? Would Optional<CallingContext> suffice? > > I think it would be possible to do -- CallingContext::Prev would have > to change to be Optional<CallingContext> Prev,
Well, that wouldn't work (then you'd have an infinitely recursive type - optional has inline storage, so if a T has an Optional<T> then T has to be infinitely large), but it doesn't need to - it can remain as a non-owning pointer. (we could add a utility to Optional<T> to retrieve a T*, null if the Optional has no current value, if it doesn't already have such an operation) >but I don't see the > extra copies being overly expensive. I'll let DeLesley make the call > since this is in perf-sensitive code. > > ~Aaron _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
