Szelethus added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53692#1285091, @NoQ wrote:
> I guess i'm running out of steam for today :) > > > `Opts.shouldDoThat()` -> `Opts.ShouldDoThat.getValue()` > > Is this really unavoidable? Like, what makes them optional when they're > always non-optional? Maybe just somehow prevent un-eagerly-initialized > AnalyzerConfig from appearing anywhere in the program? Thats a fair point, the reason why I kept `Optional<T>` is the extra safety -- it took a good couple hours to make this patch, and it didn't took days thanks to the `hasValue()` assert, since, well, how macros get expanded is always a surprise. But sure, ideally it shouldn't be there. https://reviews.llvm.org/D53692 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
