aprantl added a comment.
Added superficial LLVM coding style comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp:4735
+ // Merge directness from the canonical declaration upfront
+ if (!ObjCMethod->isDirectMethod()) {
----------------
missing `.` at end of sentence.
"Upfront" as opposed to? It would be helpful to add a ", because ..." here
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp:4754
+
+ // if the match is from the same Class (not super),
+ // validate that there is no declaration/implementation
----------------
// If
Is there a better way to express `Class (not super)`?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp:4777
+
+ if (directContainerMismatch) {
+ int decl = 0, impl = 0;
----------------
how about factoring this into a diagContainerMismatch lambda?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp:4829
+ // There can be a single declaration in any @interface container
+ // for a given direct method, look for clashes as we add them
+ //
----------------
`.`
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaDeclObjC.cpp:4845
+ // diag::err_objc_direct_on_protocol is already emitted for these
+ // with a better diagnostic, so don't do it twice
+ } else if (ObjCMethod->isDirectMethod() || IMD->isDirectMethod()) {
----------------
full sentence please
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71694/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71694
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
