rjmccall added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/clang/AST/DeclBase.h:1798
+ /// innermost enclosing BlockDecl or null if there are no enclosing blocks.
+ const BlockDecl *getInnerMostBlockDecl() const {
+ const DeclContext *Ctx = this;
----------------
"innermost" is one word, so this should be `getInnermostBlockDecl`.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:2580
+ if (const BlockDecl *BD = CurContext->getInnerMostBlockDecl())
+ if (!getDiagnostics().isIgnored(diag::warn_implicitly_retains_self,
Loc))
+ ImplicitlyRetainedSelfLocs.push_back({Loc, BD});
----------------
ahatanak wrote:
> rjmccall wrote:
> > IIRC this check can be expensive enough that it's probably not worth doing
> > if you expect these entries to typically not result in diagnostics.
> `DiagStateMap::lookup` is doing a binary search. Is that what makes this
> check expensive?
Yeah. It's not immensely expensive, but adding some entries to a vector in the
fast path and then processing them later probably makes more sense.
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D60736/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D60736
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
