================
@@ -876,7 +876,7 @@ void EmitAssemblyHelper::RunOptimizationPipeline(
<< PluginFN << toString(PassPlugin.takeError());
}
}
- for (auto PassCallback : CodeGenOpts.PassBuilderCallbacks)
+ for (const auto &PassCallback : CodeGenOpts.PassBuilderCallbacks)
----------------
tahonermann wrote:
`PassBuilderCallbacks` is defined as:
```
clang/include/clang/Basic/CodeGenOptions.h:
404 /// List of pass builder callbacks.
405 std::vector<std::function<void(llvm::PassBuilder &)>>
PassBuilderCallbacks;
```
In the case where a `std::function` element wraps a lambda, copies can be
expensive, so such avoidance makes sense. The `operator()` member of
`std::function` is already `const` qualified, so the addition of `const`
doesn't effect the behavior, at least not in the current language standards.
Such calls are valid even when a mutable lambda is wrapped. That arguably
results in a const violation, so there have been some papers that argued for
changes ([N4348](https://wg21.link/n4348), [P0045](https://wg21.link/p0045))
but to my knowledge, the standard has not been changed.
This looks like a good change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/75082
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
