aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tidy/abseil/DurationComparisonCheck.cpp:25 +static llvm::Optional<DurationScale> getScaleForInverse(llvm::StringRef Name) { + static const std::unordered_map<std::string, DurationScale> ScaleMap( + {{"ToDoubleHours", DurationScale::Hours}, ---------------- sammccall wrote: > hwright wrote: > > JonasToth wrote: > > > hwright wrote: > > > > JonasToth wrote: > > > > > I think this could be made a `DenseMap` with just the right amount of > > > > > dense entries. 12 elements seems not too much to me. > > > > > Does the key-type need to be `std::string`, or could it be > > > > > `StringRef`(or `StringLiteral` making everything `constexpr` if > > > > > possible)? > > > > > Is there some strange stuff with dangling pointers or other issues > > > > > going on? > > > > Conceptually, this could easily be `constexpr`, but my compiler doesn't > > > > seem to want to build something which is called `static constexpr > > > > llvm::DenseMap<llvm::StringRef, DurationScale>`. It's chief complaint > > > > is that such a type has a non-trivial destructor. Am I using this > > > > correctly? > > > I honestly never tried to make a `constexpr DenseMap<>` but it makes > > > sense it is not possible, as `DenseMap` is involved with dynamic memory > > > after all, which is not possible with `constexpr` (yet). So you were my > > > test-bunny ;) > > > > > > I did reread the Data-structures section in the LLVM manual, i totally > > > forgot about `StringMap` that maps strings to values. > > > `DenseMap` is good when mapping small values to each other, as we do here > > > (`const char* -> int (whatever the enum deduces too)`), which would fit. > > > `StringMap` does allocations for the strings, which we don't need. > > > > > > `constexpr` aside my bet is that `DenseMap` fits this case the better, > > > because we can lay every thing out and never touch it again. Maybe > > > someone else has better arguments for the decision :) > > > > > > Soooooo: could you please try `static const > > > llvm::DenseMap<llvm::StringRef, DurationScale>`? :) > > > (should work in theory: https://godbolt.org/z/Qo7Nv4) > > `static const llvm::DenseMap<llvm::StringRef, DurationScale>` works here. :) > Sorry for the drive-by... > This has a non-trivial destructor, so violates > https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#do-not-use-static-constructors at > least in spirit. > > Best to leak it (`auto &ScaleMap = *new const llvm::DenseMap<...>(...)`) to > avoid the destructor issues. The constructor issues are already handled by > making it function-local. I do not think this violates the coding standard -- that's talking mostly about global objects, not local objects, and is concerned about startup performance and initialization orders. I don't see any destructor ordering issues with this, so I do not think any of that applies here and leaking would be less than ideal. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D54737/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D54737 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits