================
@@ -111,24 +112,29 @@ class FileCheckType {
};
} // namespace Check
-/// Summary of a FileCheck diagnostic.
-struct FileCheckDiag {
- /// What is the FileCheck directive for this diagnostic?
- Check::FileCheckType CheckTy;
- /// Where is the FileCheck directive for this diagnostic?
- SMLoc CheckLoc;
+class MatchResultDiag;
+
+/// Abstract base class for recording a FileCheck diagnostic for a pattern
+/// (e.g., \c CHECK-NEXT directive or \c --implicit-check-not).
+///
+/// \c FileCheckDiag has two direct derived classes:
+/// - \c MatchResultDiag records a match result for a pattern. There might be
+/// more than one for a single pattern. For example, for \c CHECK-DAG there
+/// might be several discarded matches before either a good match or a
failure
+/// to match.
+/// - \c MatchNoteDiag provides an additional note about the most recent
+/// \c MatchResultDiag emitted by a FileCheck invocation. For example, there
+/// might be a fuzzy match after a failure to match.
+class FileCheckDiag {
+public:
+ enum FileCheckDiagKind { FCDK_MatchResultDiag, FCDK_MatchNoteDiag };
----------------
jdenny-ornl wrote:
Without `FCDK_`, these enumerators collide with the derived class names in
derived class methods, in particular `classof`. Is it preferred to qualify
them like `FileCheckDiag::MatchResultDiag` there instead?
Using `FCDK_` is an attempt to followed the examples in [LLVM's RTTI
docs](https://llvm.org/docs/HowToSetUpLLVMStyleRTTI.html#basic-setup). Do
those docs need to be updated for LLVM's current preferred style?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/195569
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
