alexfh added a comment.
Please add more context to the diffs.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/IdentifierNamingCheck.cpp:508
@@ +507,3 @@
+ auto &Failure = Failures[Decl];
+ for (const auto &R : Failure.Usages) {
+ if (R == Range)
----------------
berenm wrote:
> Hopefully the number of ranges in Usages will stay low. If not, `Usages`
> should be an hash table instead, but it looks like SourceRange isn't hashable
> as is.
If the ranges represent unique variable usages, then there definitely will be
corner cases that will make this code run sloooowly. I'd prefer this to be a
llvm::SmallSet<>, llvm::DenseSet<>, std::unordered_set, std::set,
std::multimap<SourceLocation, SourceLocation> or anything else providing a
sub-linear lookup time. I'd probably go with llvm::SmallSet<> with a custom
comparer for SourceRange.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13079
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
