eduucaldas added a reviewer: gribozavr2.
eduucaldas added a comment.
A proposition, upon review I'll change other tests.
One concern is that we might lose coverage while reducing noise. But I'll take
a look into that with calm when changing the tests.
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Tooling/Syntax/TreeTest.cpp:186-187
+ auto AnnotatedRanges = AnnotatedCode.ranges();
+ assert(AnnotatedRanges.size() == TreeDumps.size());
+ for (auto i = 0u; i < AnnotatedRanges.size(); i++) {
+ auto *AnnotatedNode = nodeByRange(AnnotatedRanges[i], Root);
----------------
I just wanted to do a for( auto [range, dump]& : zip(AnnotatedRanges,TreeDumps))
Is indexed loop the way to go in C++?
And also I used `0u` here because we make a comparison to
`std::vector::size_type`, is there a less error-prone way of writing those loop
indexes?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D85713/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D85713
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
