aaron.ballman added a comment. In D134453#3871386 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D134453#3871386>, @dblaikie wrote:
>> In terms of next steps, I think we should try to see if there's a "clear" >> path forward in terms of printing the types vs not printing the types. If we >> find one, then great, we go that way. But if we don't seem to have a clear >> path forward (relatively quickly; I don't think we want to drag this >> discussion on for months trying to find the perfect answer), then I think >> I'm fine with the patch as-is. It fixes the issue of `t<{}>` (with empty >> braces specifically) while retaining the status quo in other areas, but >> still exposes useful functionality through the additional printing policy. >> Does that sound reasonable? > > If you reckon (1) is better overall anyway - happy enough to defer to your > opinion there and go with that, skip/omit the printing policy. Okay, thanks for that! I'm still happy to consider alternatives if we can think of any, FWIW. > I think the policy is like adding off-by-default warnings, and supporting a > use case (using the string name for reflection when we'd recommend the AST) I > don't think we want to encourage/support. That's a fair point. So if we find no better approach, drop the policy and just always print types. > Admittedly going with (1) means that @DoDoENT's use case will then work, > until/unless we come back around and make more strategic use of type names in > this printing in the future to bring down the verbosity - so I'd still > discourage that use case & warn that this isn't a guarantee that all type > names will be included going forward. Absolutely agreed! IMO, whatever strings you get out of something with a printing policy generally have very little/no stability guarantees (it's part of the C++ API surface, so it's exactly as stable as any other C++ API). We'll change printing behavior whenever we feel the need to. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D134453/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D134453 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits