steveire added inline comments.
================ Comment at: include/clang/AST/DeclBase.h:1139 + void dump(raw_ostream &Out, bool Deserialize = false, + ASTDumpOutputFormat OutputFormat = ADOF_Default) const; ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > steveire wrote: > > I think we've talked about this before, but I don't think growing > > interfaces like this is the best way forward. An enum is a less-good > > replacement for an object (ie making the user of the API responsible for > > creating the dumper they want to use). > > > > I think that could be made more convenient in the future. What do you think? > I think that may be a good future improvement, yes. > > One thing to take on balance when considering this for the future is that > `dump()` can be called from within a debugger and that's a bit harder to > accomplish with an object interface. I'm not certain that will be a big issue > for my use case, but it may matter to some folks. I don't think "it may matter to some folks." is a good guideline to use when designing an API. I have a patch which moves ASTDumper to its own header which I have just uploaded here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61835 If additional args to `dump()` are mainly for debugging, then adding new args which are not for debugging doesn't seem right. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D60910/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D60910 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
