aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/clang/AST/Expr.h:5084
+ /// storage of Stmt * and TypeSourceInfo * in GenericSelectionExpr.
+ template <bool Const> class AssociationIteratorTy {
+ friend class GenericSelectionExpr;
----------------
riccibruno wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > riccibruno wrote:
> > > dblaikie wrote:
> > > > Worth using any of the iterator helpers LLVM has? (iterator_facade or
> > > > the like)
> > > I did try to use `iteratore_facade` but for some reason I was getting
> > > strange overload resolution failures with it.
> > >
> > > In the end it did not save much and so I just rewrote the boiler-plate
> > > (especially given that if we end up going with an input iterator there is
> > > not going to be much boiler-plate).
> > Does using the `iterator_facade_base` help now that we're back to an input
> > iterator? It seems like that should be able to get rid of some of the
> > boilerplate.
> I must be holding it wrong; for some reason the post-fix operator ++ is not
> getting found when I use `iterator_facade_base`. It also forces me to define
> `operator==` as a member instead of a non-member function. Do you mind
> terribly if I don't use it ? It only at best avoid me to write `operator!=`
> and `operator++(int)`.
It also removes all of the typedefs and `operator->()`, so it does remove quite
a bit of boilerplate. You shouldn't have to do anything special to get it to
locate the postfix operator++ though (so long as you use public inheritance),
which makes me wonder what's going on for your use. I would like to understand
more about why this base class doesn't work here when it seems to work fine for
the other uses in the code base.
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D57106/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D57106
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
