search for: d17130

> On Feb 10, 2016, at 7:34 PM, George Burgess IV via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > Someone should stick it in the coding standards? > > I'm happy to give this a shot. My 2c: I don’t think that we can agree to abstract code guidelines without knowing what it means in practice for the codebase. If you’re interested in this, please include a diff

...at all. > (seemingly slowest compile times, biggest hinderance to my productivity) Building static analyzer is not slower than building clang. llvm/clang is known for slow compile times. You an search the archive for discussions on how those could be lowered. > See: http://reviews.llvm.org/D17130 <http://reviews.llvm.org/D17130> Most of the changes in the patch move trivial constructor implementations “{}” out of the headers. There are only a couple that span more than one line of code. These implementations have not changed for months/years so it’s not likely you’ll suffer from reb...