ioeric added a comment. Could you elaborate on the intention of this change? Is the intention of having more information in `SymbolOccurrence` to benefit users of the rename library or to simplify the internal implementation?
================ Comment at: include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/Rename/SymbolOccurrences.h:74 + // The declaration in which the nested name is contained (can be nullptr). + const Decl *Context; + // The nested name being replaced (can be nullptr). ---------------- A `SymbolOccurrence` is likely to out-live an AST (e.g. when used in clang-refactor or serialized to files), so it might not be safe to store references to ASTs here. If we really want AST information in the `SymbolOccurrence`, we could probably derive from it and use only internally. But it doesn't make sense to pass AST references out to users. https://reviews.llvm.org/D39290 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
