> On 2015-Jul-22, at 14:55, Vedant Kumar <v...@apple.com> wrote: > > Part 2 of the Sema::checkForFunctionCall() patch attached. > >> Probably a `SmallVector<..., 16>` or some such would make sense >> instead of a `std::vector<...>`. > > Done. > >> I haven't seen `reference_wrapper<>` at all in LLVM, so I'm not sure >> all the supported standard libraries have it available. Please use >> `CFGBlock*` instead. > > Done. > >> >>> + Stack.emplace_back(std::make_pair(std::ref(Block), State)); >> >> With `emplace_back()`, you can call any constructor: >> >> Stack.emplace_back(&Block, State); > > That makes things much cleaner. > >> I see you've maintained the visitation order by reversing iteration. >> Makes sense for this commit, but it might be nice to clean this up >> in a follow-up (assuming visitation order doesn't matter here, which >> I don't think it does?): > > I maintained the old iteration order just to be extra careful. > > Switching to a normal forward iterator doesn’t seem to affect anything. > Aesthetically, this seems preferable. Something for a follow-up?
Yup, better for a follow-up. > <checkForFunctionCall-2.patch> This LGTM, once the prep patch is ready. _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits