ldionne added subscribers: david_stone, mattcalabrese, mpark. ldionne added a comment.
In D91311#2400917 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D91311#2400917>, @dblaikie wrote: > How would that work for users - they would get error messages from the > compiler using type names that don't exist in the source code? I'd have > thought that would be quite confusing. Yes, if a library author decides to say something like: template<class _CharT, class _Traits> class [[preferred_name(basic_string_view<char>, "ahaha I'm such a troll")]] basic_string_view { ... }; Then you might get compiler errors that are not super helpful. I don't think the fact that such nonsense is doable means that we shouldn't give this control to library authors. For instance, I can easily imagine a library that provides an API where some types shouldn't be named (for example expression templates). In that case, you might want to describe a type by a string along the lines of `decltype(some-expression)`, which could potentially be a lot more useful than the ability to refer to a typedef. Does this sort of usage ring true to someone else? Pinging fellow library folks in case they have an opinion. @mattcalabrese @david_stone @mpark Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D91311/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D91311 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
