================
@@ -235,6 +266,20 @@ class FactSet {
return false;
}
+ std::optional<FactID> replaceLock(FactManager &FM, iterator It,
+ std::unique_ptr<FactEntry> Entry) {
+ if (It == end())
+ return std::nullopt;
+ FactID F = FM.newFact(std::move(Entry));
+ *It = F;
+ return F;
+ }
+
+ std::optional<FactID> replaceLock(FactManager &FM, const CapabilityExpr
&CapE,
+ std::unique_ptr<FactEntry> Entry) {
+ return replaceLock(FM, findLockIter(FM, CapE), std::move(Entry));
+ }
+
----------------
melver wrote:
replaceLock without caller-iterator still saves a copy+pop_back+push_back. Not
much, but not nothing either.
This PR should include the bare minimum use of replaceLock - I have one patch
queued that is not part of this PR to do an unrelated substitution with
replaceLock.
If anything I'd move replaceLock introduction before this PR, but I think we're
just splitting hairs at that point.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137133
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
