wenlei accepted this revision.
wenlei added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
lgtm, thanks.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Analysis/InlineAdvisor.cpp:52
+namespace {
+using namespace llvm::ore;
----------------
mtrofin wrote:
> wenlei wrote:
> > curious why do we need anonymous namespace here?
> iiuc it's preferred we place file-local types inside an anonymous namespace.
>
> Looking now at the [[
> https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#anonymous-namespaces | style
> guideline ]], it touts their benefits but also says I should have only placed
> de decl there and the impl of those members out... but the members are quite
> trivial. Happy to move them out though.
Thanks for the pointer. I don't have a strong opinion but slightly leaning
towards moving out of anonymous namespace be consistent with how other
InlineAdvice is organized (DefaultInlineAdvice, MLInlineAdvice not in anonymous
namespace).
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D110891/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D110891
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
