Szelethus added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54466#1305305, @baloghadamsoftware wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54466#1297887, @NoQ wrote: > > > > Hmmm, shouldn't we add this to `MemRegion`'s interface instead? > > > This: > > > I wouldn't insist, but this does indeed sound useful. I suggest > > `MemRegion::getMostDerivedObjectRegion()` or something like that. > > vs > > > Also, ugh, that nomenclature: the base region of `CXXBaseObjectRegion` in > > fact represents the //derived// object. > > So if `CXXBaseObjectRegion` is the derived object, then > `MemRegion::getMostDerivedObjectRegion()` gets the least derived object > region now? Hmm, are there any particular reasons against renaming it to `CXXDerivedRegion`? https://reviews.llvm.org/D54466 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
