search for: nodeconstructors

...s more familiar with the code and APIs in question. > > I'd also like to update them so that > > > > llvm::Optional<std::pair<std::string, MatcherCtor>> > > getNodeConstructorType(ASTNodeKind targetType) { > > auto const &ctors = RegistryData->nodeConstructors(); > > auto it = llvm::find_if( > > ctors, [targetType](const NodeConstructorMap::value_type &ctor) { > > return ctor.first.isSame(targetType); > > }); > > if (it == ctors.end()) > > return llvm::None; > > return it->second; &g...

...bjects which have a validity check such as isNone(), isValid(), isNull() or just `!= nullptr` etc. I'd also like to update them so that llvm::Optional<std::pair<std::string, MatcherCtor>> getNodeConstructorType(ASTNodeKind targetType) { auto const &ctors = RegistryData->nodeConstructors(); auto it = llvm::find_if( ctors, [targetType](const NodeConstructorMap::value_type &ctor) { return ctor.first.isSame(targetType); }); if (it == ctors.end()) return llvm::None; return it->second; } is acceptable. The `auto it` is already acceptable, but...

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,