steveire added a comment. In D80961#2073049 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D80961#2073049>, @klimek wrote:
> Without jumping into the discussion whether it should be the default, I think > we should be able to control template instantiation visitation separately > from other implicit nodes. Hmm, `IgnoreUnlessSpelledInSource` is designed and named to fill that role. After this patch is in, I intend to make it also control whether the implicit node here is dumped/matchable: https://godbolt.org/z/V_KCFm > Having to put AsIs on a matcher every time you need to match template > instantiations is a rather big change (suddenly you have to change all the > matchers you've written so far). I don't think that's true. You have to change the matchers you've written which deliberately match the instantiation, but you can also (optionally) simplify the others to remove `unless(isInTemplateInstantiation())` from them. The third category of matchers are the ones where you haven't used `unless(isInTemplateInstantiation())` even though you should have and you have a bug that you don't know about yet. This change fixes those ones. > I love the idea of being able to control visitation of template instantiation. > I am somewhat torn on whether it should be the default, and would like to > see more data. > I feel more strongly about needing AsIs when I want to match template > instantiations. I feel strongly that the default should not change code in a known-wrong way, as the unit test demonstrates. It's not a novice-friendly default. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80961/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80961 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
