I'm still wondering whether searching for hasDecl in include/clang/AST and just writing down the list that comes up would be an easier to maintain solution...
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Manuel Klimek <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:29 PM, Samuel Benzaquen <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> >> ================ >> Comment at: include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h:1690 >> @@ -1684,1 +1689,3 @@ >> + TemplateSpecializationType), >> + false>(InnerMatcher); >> } >> ---------------- >> Manuel Klimek wrote: >> > /*EnableCompileTimeChecks=*/false >> > (here and elsewhere) >> > >> > On the other hand, I'm not sure I like this (and I've gone back and >> forth on that detail myself ;) >> > There's some principal beauty to being able to use all nodes that have >> getDecl() in hasDeclaration. On the other hand, the further down we push >> the error checks, the worse the error messages for our users. Due to how >> bad template error messages still are, this is one of the largest problems >> we have today. The dynamic matchers will hopefully get some of that out of >> the way, but I still believe that for now we just want to spell out all the >> types it's callable on. >> Do you have a such a list? >> From the implementation of HasDeclarationMatcher is not obvious. >> > > Ah, I didn't remember we added the templated getDecl() overload at some > point... >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
