ymandel marked an inline comment as done.
ymandel added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Tooling/SourceCodeBuildersTest.cpp:373
+TEST(SourceCodeBuildersTest, BuildAccessSmartPointer) {
+ testBuilder(buildAccess, "Smart x; x;", "x->");
+}
----------------
gribozavr2 wrote:
> This is a case where the old APIs provided the user with a choice, but the
> new API does not. If the user wanted to call a method on the smart pointer
> itself (e.g., `reset()`), they could have used `buildDot` to get `x.`.
>
> IDK if it is an important use case, but I thought I'd mention it, since the
> new API is not 100% equivalent to the ones that it replaces.
Agreed. I think it is important and I should add a (defaulted) parameter to
`buildAccess` that forces "smart" pointers to be treated like any other value.
WDYT?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D116377/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D116377
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
