rjmccall added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CodeGenModule.cpp:5063
const_cast<ObjCImplementationDecl *>(D), PID);
}
}
----------------
aprantl wrote:
> rjmccall wrote:
> > Is this special treatment still necessary? Won't we encounter the getter
> > and setter on the normal pass over the method definitions in the
> > `@implementation`?
> We don't know which ObjMethodDecls without bodies are property accessor
> implementations since there is no pointer from the ObjCMethodDecl back to the
> ObjCPropertyImplDecl.
I mean, this doesn't seem like an unreasonable thing to be able to discover
given just an `ObjCMethodDecl`. We can certainly set something on the
declaration that says that it represents a synthesized method definition (and
is therefore a definition for the purposes of `isDefined` or anything similar).
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68108/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D68108
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
