Szelethus added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54438#1296239, @NoQ wrote:
> Mm, i don't understand. I mean, what prevents you from cutting it off even > earlier and completely omitting that part of the patch? Somebody will get to > this later in order to see how exactly does the separation needs to be > performed. I somewhat misunderstood what you meant in your earlier comment. Originally, I created `CStringBase`, but not `MallocBase`, hence the insane amount of workaround, witch eventually lead to the createion of `MallocBase`, but I never removed the now unnecessary stuff, but now that you've shed some light to it, it makes little sense for it to stay around. I guess you could say that I couldn't see the forest for the trees. Thanks! There's still a lot of work to be done, as this patch supplies a new way of expressing dependencies, but doesn't actually stop anyone from doing this mistake again, but let that be an issue for another time. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D54438 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
