Alexander_Droste added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
tools/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/MPI-Checker/Container.hpp:10-11
@@ +9,4 @@
+///
+/// \file
+/// This file defines convenience templates for C++ container class usage.
+///
----------------
gribozavr wrote:
> This file re-invents a lot of APIs that are currently under review by the C++
> committee under the Ranges effort. I think most of the wrappers are more or
> less trivial and should use STL directly, or the wrappers should match
> exactly the currently proposed STL APIs.
Ok, I'll try to mimic the API of the proposal. Can I keep the `cont::`
namespace?
================
Comment at:
tools/clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/MPI-Checker/Container.hpp:88-109
@@ +87,24 @@
+
+/// \brief Deletes element at given index.
+///
+/// \param container
+/// \param index
+template <typename T> void eraseIndex(T &container, size_t idx) {
+ container.erase(container.begin() + idx);
+}
+
+/// \brief Sort with default criterion.
+///
+/// \param container
+template <typename T> void sort(T &container) {
+ std::sort(container.begin(), container.end());
+}
+
+/// \brief Sort by given predicate.
+///
+/// \param container
+/// \param predicate
+template <typename T, typename P> void sortPred(T &container, P predicate) {
+ std::sort(container.begin(), container.end(), predicate);
+}
+
----------------
gribozavr wrote:
> I question the value of such trivial wrappers.
I like to use them because they make things a little bit more compact.
`sort(container.begin(), container.end(), predicate)`
vs.
`sortPred(container, predicate)`
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12761
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
