balazs-benics-sonarsource wrote: Thanks for your long review. I'm sorry if the poor code quality hindered the comprehension. My goal was to minimize the diff for easier review, but I admit that I should have attached some considerations as to why I implemented it this way, and also how different parts work under the hood. I'll keep this in mind for next time!
I'm still working through your review, but I wanted to post a quick update because I think the renamings in place now may make refining your stance easier. In short, I decided to put a strong type in place to track and enforce the bind limit. Now, we should have greater confidence of that nothing misses the checks. However, this comes at the cost of polluting the other APIs, like `BindDefaultInitial` or `BindDefaultZero` where it's highly unexpected to hit this binding limit - because all they usually do is basically add one default and maybe an additional direct binding. But now, looking at it, it led to a more consistent API, where it's harder to make mistakes, so I'm all for this change. Now, I'll get back to the rest of your comments and respond eventually. Thanks! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/127602 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
