njames93 added a comment.

In D74463#1878290 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D74463#1878290>, @vingeldal wrote:
> I am pretty sure that an option to allow short names would cause  a 
> relatively big hit on performance (relative to how it runs without the 
> option) for this check while also potentially causing some false negatives 
> (which I would very much like to avoid).


Highly unlikely, the additional name length check would only be ran on 
functions where the consecutive param types occur, then the check itself is 
very fast, you don't even need to compute the length as its stored in the 
identifier info, finally on cases where the name check prevents a diagnostic 
that is a huge performance win. The false negatives could kind of be an issue, 
but we could leave that up to the developer who is running the check.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D74463/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D74463



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to