Szelethus marked 2 inline comments as done. Szelethus added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/CheckerRegistryData.h:83 + +using CmdLineOptionList = llvm::SmallVector<CmdLineOption, 0>; + ---------------- gamesh411 wrote: > Could you please explain why use zero for the small-vector element count? My > first thought would be that literally anything other than 0 would be more > beneficial because of non-dynamic storage, even if we have use a totally > ad-hoc value here (like 8 or 42 or whatever). Why not std::vector if we do > not want static storage? Maybe there is something that I'm just not aware of > :D https://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html#llvm-adt-smallvector-h > `SmallVector` has grown a few other minor advantages over `std::vector`, > causing `SmallVector<Type, 0>` to be preferred over `std::vector<Type>`. ================ Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Frontend/CheckerRegistry.cpp:472 - using CmdLineOption = CheckerRegistry::CmdLineOption; + using CmdLineOption = CmdLineOption; ---------------- gamesh411 wrote: > A bit confused here. It is not immediately clear for me from which namespace > are we importing CmdLineOption. Is it possible to use a fully qualified type > name on the RHS of the using statement? This looks stupid because it is :^) Accidentally left it there. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D82585/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D82585 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
