================
@@ -1718,15 +1719,30 @@ class Record {
ArrayRef<AssertionInfo> getAssertions() const { return Assertions; }
ArrayRef<DumpInfo> getDumps() const { return Dumps; }
- ArrayRef<std::pair<const Record *, SMRange>> getSuperClasses() const {
- return SuperClasses;
+ /// Append all superclasses in post-order to \p Classes.
+ void getSuperClasses(std::vector<const Record *> &Classes) const {
+ for (const auto &[SC, R] : DirectSuperClasses) {
+ SC->getSuperClasses(Classes);
+ Classes.push_back(SC);
+ }
+ }
+
+ /// Return all superclasses in post-order.
+ std::vector<const Record *> getSuperClasses() const {
+ std::vector<const Record *> Classes;
+ getSuperClasses(Classes);
+ return Classes;
}
/// Determine whether this record has the specified direct superclass.
- bool hasDirectSuperClass(const Record *SuperClass) const;
+ bool hasDirectSuperClass(const Record *SuperClass) const {
+ return is_contained(make_first_range(DirectSuperClasses), SuperClass);
+ }
- /// Append the direct superclasses of this record to Classes.
- void getDirectSuperClasses(SmallVectorImpl<const Record *> &Classes) const;
+ /// Return the direct superclasses of this record.
+ ArrayRef<std::pair<const Record *, SMRange>> getDirectSuperClasses() const {
----------------
mshockwave wrote:
> I'm not sure location should be removed completely as it might be used for
> diagnostics.
> On the other hand, I can't immediately think of a case where the location of
> a super-class reference in an error message would be useful.
Though unfortunately we're not doing it at this moment, I think we _should_
make good uses of this location (where the superclass was reference) to show a
nice backtrace. Personally I feel like if it doesn't take a lot of efforts we
should probably keep the location.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/123072
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
