rhiro marked an inline comment as done.
rhiro added a comment.
Thanks for the review! I regenerated the docs and switched the `this` capture
case to be an override of `hasAnyCapture`.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchers.h:4056
+/// matches [this](){};
+AST_MATCHER(LambdaExpr, capturesThis) {
+ for (const LambdaCapture &Capture : Node.captures()) {
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> I'm a bit less certain about the utility of this matcher. I would have
> assumed you could do `hasAnyCapture(cxxThisExpr())` to get the same behavior,
> but I am guessing that won't work -- though you may be able to add an
> overload to `hasAnyCapture()` to make that work. I think that might be a
> better approach, if it works.
Thanks for that idea, it does seem a bit cleaner.
It would be nice if we could write a Matcher<LambdaCapture>, so that the macro
composition could be more generically nested. e.g. hasAnyCapture that just
loops over the LambdaCaptures and passes them to the child matcher. However,
when I tried this, it became apparent that it is not a Node type that can be
matched on, and would require nontrivial changes.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72414/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72414
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
