Serafean wrote: > > > I'm not certain this is the correct approach. I think we should expose a > > > cursor kind for a coroutine statement body so that you can test for this > > > sort of thing if needed > > > > > > Ok, I'll see how exposing the body's compound statement would work. > > Hopefully it's straightforward: > > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/6e205c0d8e99c44c420afd09d258b8e8fa924373/clang/tools/libclang/CXCursor.cpp#L296
It was very straightforward: got point 1 functional just by exposing the CoroutineBodyStmt. Thanks for the pointer. > > > > This was a naive attempt to do part 1, as so far I have no idea how to do > > the rest. > > Thanks for the comments. > > Ah good to know, thank you! I think this doesn't necessarily require the > helper functions to be upstream, but it will require exposing more low-level > details from the C indexing APIs. We usually try to expose the building > blocks rather than the helper methods, so focusing on what information is > necessary to expose to get to the point of writing a helper method would be a > good approach IMO. Ok, will do it that way. Closing this PR, but I'll be back ;) https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/182685 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
