aaron.ballman added a comment. In D88275#2313342 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D88275#2313342>, @ymandel wrote:
> In D88275#2305989 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D88275#2305989>, @aaron.ballman > wrote: > >> In D88275#2303283 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D88275#2303283>, @ymandel wrote: >> >>>> I'm not concerned about the basic idea behind the proposed matcher, I'm >>>> only worried we're making AST matching more confusing by having two >>>> different ways of inconsistently accomplishing the same-ish thing. >>> >>> Aaron, I appreciate this concern, but I would argue that this matcher isn't >>> making things any worse. We already have the various `ignoringImplicit` >>> matchers, and this new one simply parallels those, but for parents. So, it >>> is in some sense "completing" an existing API, which together is an >>> alternative to `traverse`. >> >> I'm not certain I agree with that reasoning because you can extend it to >> literally any match that may interact with implicit nodes, which is the >> whole point to the spelled in source traversal mode. I'm not certain it's a >> good design for us to continue to add one-off ways to ignore implicit nodes. > > I appreciate your point, but I'm personally inclined to allow progress while > we figure these larger issues out. That said, I'm in no rush and would like > a solution that we're both happy with. How do you propose we proceed, > especially given that `traverse` does not currently support this case? It > seems that progress is in part blocked on hearing back from steveire, but > it's been over a week since you added him to the review thread. Is there some > other way to ping him? Thank you for your patience while we sort this out. I've pinged @steveire off-list, so hopefully he'll respond with his thoughts. If we don't hear from Stephen in the next week or so, I think we should proceed with your proposed patch to get you unblocked (adding one more "ignore implicit" variant isn't the end of the world, I just want us to be thoughtful about whether we want to add new matchers in this space or to work on the traversal mode instead). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D88275/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D88275 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
