aaron.ballman added a comment. In D122248#3405644 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D122248#3405644>, @yihanaa wrote:
> In D122248#3405166 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D122248#3405166>, @erichkeane > wrote: > >> In D122248#3405062 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D122248#3405062>, >> @aaron.ballman wrote: >> >>> In D122248#3403734 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D122248#3403734>, @yihanaa >>> wrote: >>> >>>> What if we don't emit '=' for zero-width bitfield, like this: >>>> >>>> struct Bar { >>>> unsigned c : 1; >>>> unsigned : 3; >>>> unsigned : 0; >>>> unsigned b; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> struct Bar { >>>> unsigned int c : 1 = 0 >>>> unsigned int : 3 = 0 >>>> unsigned int : 0 >>>> unsigned int b = 0 >>>> } >>>> >>>> What do you all think? >>> >>> I like this idea best of all! >> >> Agreed! > > @erichkeane @aaron.ballman > Previously we used FieldDecl->getNameAsString to get the field name, but the > comments for this function indicate that it is Deprecated，and suggestion move > clients to getName(). > > The FieldDecl->getName() return the anonymous inner struct's name like: > > struct T3A { > union { > int a; > char b[4]; > }; > }; > > struct T3A { > union T3A::(anonymous at ./builtin_dump_struct.c:77:5) { > int a = 42 > char[4] b = 0x2a > } > } > > what do you all think? I would probably keep using `getNameAsString()` as I don't think the extra information helps overly much. That interface was marked deprecated 13 years ago, so don't feel bad for making use of it. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D122248/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D122248 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
