Katze719 wrote: > > thanks, that makes sense, my intention was not to make parameter names part > > of the function type, but to expose the `ParmVarDecls` stored in > > `FunctionProtoTypeLoc` as source information on the typedef or alias > > would a separate representation for that information make more sense, or is > > it simply out of scope for the JSON AST dump? i would be happy to rework > > the patch if there is a suitable approach > > Thank you for the offer! It's worth putting more thought into, but my initial > inclination is that this feels out of scope for AST dumping. The names of the > parameters aren't semantically meaningful within the type even if you can > write them (e.g., `(void (*)(int param))nullptr` is valid to write, but > `param` is entirely meaningless). So it doesn't really help anyone understand > the AST if we print it, but I can see how it's useful information for > tooling. But tooling needs are usually better handled via libclang or AST > matchers + the C++ APIs.
Got it, thanks for your time. i will keep handling this downstream in my tool ASTrein and close the PR https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/218740 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
