comex added a comment. In D67647#1674773 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D67647#1674773>, @dblaikie wrote:
> I wasn't expecting it to involve all this work - but instead to change > "arguments()" to return ArrayRef. Though perhaps you didn't go that route to > allow future fixes to the strict aliasing (by having an adapting iterator - > or perhaps arguments() already uses such an iterator that doesn't hit the > strict aliasing issue?) needing to do even more cleaunp work? Yeah, `arguments()` returns an adapting iterator. >> - Add an `operator[]` implementation to `iterator_range`. > > I'm not sure that's appropriate - not all types with begin() and end() (even > those with random access iterators) would have op[], so it doesn't seem > appropriate to add it/depend on it? Random access iterators are supposed to have `operator[]`, according to: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/iterator/RandomAccessIterator/ But the use of a template ensures that it doesn't cause an error with types that don't have `operator[]`, whether they are marked as random-access or not. I checked the spec for "real" C++20 ranges... it seems that random access ranges don't always have `operator[]`, but "view_interface" (which is a type of range) does: https://eel.is/c++draft/view.interface Anyway, I don't think it hurts to have it on this little imitation. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67647/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67647 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
