rsmith added a comment. I don't think out-of-tree experiments on possibilities for move semantics are especially motivating for this, one way or the other, but I do think it would be nice to make some kind of change here.
What do we think about renaming `isRValue()` to `isPRValue()` and renaming `VK_RValue` to `VK_PRValue`, adding a "real" `isRValue()`, and then performing this cleanup? I think the current state of treating "rvalue" as sometimes meaning rvalue and sometimes meaning "prvalue" is unhelpful and confusing, and this change makes it worse because `isRValue` *could* be checking for an rvalue whereas a comparison against `VK_RValue` more clearly is only looking for one specific value category rather than two. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D100733/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D100733 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
