ilya-biryukov marked 2 inline comments as done. ilya-biryukov added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/AST/Decl.h:317-318 + /// this function returns "A::B::". + void printQualifier(raw_ostream &OS) const; + void printQualifier(raw_ostream &OS, const PrintingPolicy &Policy) const; + ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > ilya-biryukov wrote: > > aaron.ballman wrote: > > > I'm not keen on "qualifier" here because types have qualifiers. How about > > > `printNestedNameSpecifier()`? > > Now I understand why we clang uses 'nested name specifier' everywhere! > > Renamed per your suggestions. > > FWIW, I would rather use `NameQualifier` and `TypeQualifier` to > > disambiguate between the two. > > `NestedNameSpecifier` is a bit too long for my taste. But happy to stick > > with the conventions in the codebase. > I think it'd be a pretty large undertaking to hit all of the places where we > talk about qualifiers to get to the point where that distinction makes sense. > I think we should just stick with nested name specifier, as that's a term of > art from the standard for this concept. Fully agree, it's too late to change it at this point. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67825/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67825 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
