https://github.com/ojhunt requested changes to this pull request.
I don't believe this is a good change sorry - it's a relatively large
abstraction layer to "simplify" maybe two actual expressions.
If we really wanted to do something here I would probably just replace the
optional<> with
```cpp
bool IsArraySizeDependent = false;
bool ... = false;
if (ArraySize) {
set all the "there is an array size" variables as appropriate
}
```
It seems the main concern is the compound conditions, which is consistent with
what other code does, but I would prefer to reduce that in general.
But the issue here is not made better with an abstraction (the better option
would be actual language support for optional in c++)
I've marked as "request changes" but I think this is probably the wrong tack,
and I'm not sure the problem with new/delete Sema is this bit. There's so much
more that is so much worse.
While not an option for clang any time soon, I have wondered if reflection
could be used in a way to make this kind of thing more expensive.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/186617
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
