Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "isnone".
Did you mean:
isdone
2018 Nov 25
6
RFC: Modernizing our use of auto
...ance)
obj.someApi(ParserInstance);
}
is ok or not.
In the case that came up in review for me, the code I submitted is
template <typename BaseT, typename DerivedT>
void registerIfNodeMatcher(...) {
auto NodeKind = ASTNodeKind::getFromNodeKind<DerivedT>();
if (!NodeKind.isNone())
NodeCtors[NodeKind] = std::make_pair(MatcherName, Descriptor);
}
but it was rejected as unreadable and I was given a link to the coding
guidelines.
'NodeKind' appears three times in one line in that code and the
requirement is to add it again. ASTNodeKind is a very commonly used...
2018 Dec 04
4
[cfe-dev] RFC: Modernizing our use of auto
...understand.
> In the case that came up in review for me, the code I submitted is
> >
> > template <typename BaseT, typename DerivedT>
> > void registerIfNodeMatcher(...) {
> > auto NodeKind = ASTNodeKind::getFromNodeKind<DerivedT>();
> > if (!NodeKind.isNone())
> > NodeCtors[NodeKind] = std::make_pair(MatcherName, Descriptor);
> > }
> >
> > but it was rejected as unreadable and I was given a link to the coding
> guidelines.
>
> I agree, this seems overly strict.
>
I mean maybe. But looking at the example, I don...
2018 Dec 31
4
RFC: Modernizing our use of auto
On Dec 16, 2018, at 11:44 AM, Stephen Kelly via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On 25/11/2018 14:43, Stephen Kelly via llvm-dev wrote:
>> However this is a proposal for more modern thinking regarding the permissiveness of auto in LLVM codebases.
>> Currently the rule on the use of auto is here:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the input on this topic,