teemperor marked 4 inline comments as done. teemperor added a comment. (Phabricator didn't send my draft, sorry for the delay).
I have more similar patches coming up for the other uses of LazyBool, so I would prefer finishing the implementation in LLDB and then afterwards asking if the ADT folks want it. I moved this patch to LLVM code style to make this easier later on. Sounds good? To add to @labath's points about performance: If we have the calc* functions as lambdas, then I would have to declare all these lambdas in the constructor, which doesn't look very nice. ================ Comment at: include/lldb/Utility/Lazy.h:25-28 + T m_value; + bool m_needs_update; + + static_assert(std::is_trivial<T>::value, "Only trivial types are supported."); ---------------- labath wrote: > if you use `Optional<T>` instead of hand-rolling the flag here, you could > probably get rid of the "trivial type" limitation. Makes sense, thanks! https://reviews.llvm.org/D51557 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
