royjacobson added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/bindings/python/clang/cindex.py:1530 + + def record_needs_implicit_default_constructor(self): + """Returns True if the cursor refers to a C++ record declaration ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > I don't think we should expose any of the "needs" functions like this -- > > those are internal implementation details of the class and I don't think we > > want to calcify that into something we have to support forever. As we add > > members to a class, we recalculate whether the added member causes us to > > delete defaulted special members (among other things), and the "needs" > > functions are basically used when the class is completed to handle lazily > > created special members. I'm pretty sure that lazy creation is not mandated > > by the standard, which is why I think the "needs" functions are more of an > > implementation detail. > CC @erichkeane and @royjacobson as folks who have been in this same area of > the compiler to see if they agree or disagree with my assessment there. I think so. The 'needs_*' functions query `DeclaredSpecialMembers` and I'm pretty sure it's modified when we add the implicit definitions in the class completion code. So this looks a bit suspicious. Is this API //meant// to be used with incomplete classes? For complete classes I think looking up the default/move/copy constructor and calling `isImplicit()` is the way to do it. About the 'is deleted' API - can't the same be done for those functions as well so we have a smaller API? If this //is// meant to be used with incomplete classes for efficiency that would be another thing, I guess. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D135557/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D135557 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
