klimek added a comment. In D84306#2294952 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D84306#2294952>, @MyDeveloperDay wrote:
> Which bit do you find more complex? adding something to the FormatToken or > the use of the `is()` calls? I think mainly that a) the language doesn't support bitfields well yet, as evidenced by having to pull the default values into the constructor, where it's harder to maintain imo (but that will change) b) we'll need to continuously take care that the bitfields stay bundled The setters / getters are generally fine, I think; I believe the decision to treat this as a struct from the very beginning of the project was bad, but refactoring this into something more cohesive seems like a daunting task. To be clear, I don't think it's a lot of complexity, I was mainly wondering whether we have some measurement what it gets us. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D84306/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D84306 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
