dawn marked 3 inline comments as done.
dawn added a comment.
> It seems like you combined "find this decl instance within a decl context"
> with "find a decl by name in the CompilerDeclContext and optionally get the
> type".
It it exactly "find this decl instance within a decl context".
> I am still unclear as to what the name and type are doing in
> DeclContextCountDeclLevels. I don't see how we would ever have a decl (in
> opaque_find_decl_ctx) that isn't unique where the same decl could have
> different names and different types?
The optional name is required by languages (like C++) to handle using
declarations like:
void poo();
namespace ns {
void foo();
void goo();
}
void bar() {
using ns::foo;
// Here, 'foo' is needed so that we can match it
// with the using declaration.
//
// We want the API to return 0 for 'foo',
// -1 for 'goo', and 1 for 'poo'.
}
The optional type might be required by languages which have a using
declaration-like concept where a type can be specified, like:
void foo(int, int);
namespace ns {
void foo();
void foo(int);
}
void bar() {
using_like ns::foo(int);
// Here, 'foo' and its type are both needed so that
// we can match it with the using_like declaration.
//
// We want the API to return 0 for { 'foo', 'void(int)' },
// -1 for { 'foo', 'void()' },
// and 1 for { 'foo', 'void(int, int)' },
}
The name and type are optional (default to 0) for languages which don't have
these concepts.
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D15312
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
