On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Justin Bogner <[email protected]> wrote:
> Rafael Espíndola <[email protected]> writes: > > It looks like there are code paths that are duplicated for > > constructors and destructors just because > > we have both CXXCtorType and CXXDtorsTypes. > > > > This patch introduces a CDtorType enum that lets us reduce the > > duplication a bit. > > Looks like a pretty nice cleanup to me, but I find the CDtor naming a > bit subtle. Not sure I have a much better idea, but a couple that come > to mind are "COrDtor" or "CtorDtor". Alernatively we could go for > something like CXXSpecial or CXXSpecMem, but these imply assignment as > well, which is unfortunate. > > (feel free to veto me, I'm not convinced any of the names I've come up > with are actually *better*) > I had the same thought & think CtorDtorTypes is pretty reasonable. > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
