jkorous marked 8 inline comments as done.
jkorous added a comment.
Addressed some comments, going to update the diff.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Index/IndexRecordHasher.cpp:291
+
+hash_code IndexRecordHasher::hashImpl(const Decl *D) {
+ return DeclHashVisitor(*this).Visit(D);
----------------
gribozavr wrote:
> hashImpl => cachedHashImpl
Honestly, I am not sure this would be better. I added a comment about this set
of methods in the header file. Wouldn't mind renaming them but think `hashImpl`
is actually quite accurate.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Index/IndexRecordHasher.cpp:409
+
+ // Unhandled type.
+ return Hash;
----------------
gribozavr wrote:
> So what is the failure mode for unhandled types, what is the effect on the
> whole system?
Seems like just the `InitialHash` is returned at the moment.
I guess using llvm::Optional<hash_code> as a return type would be better. WDYT?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D58749/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D58749
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
