dexonsmith accepted this revision.
dexonsmith added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp:3093
+
+static bool ParsePreprocessorArgs(PreprocessorOptions &Opts, ArgList &Args,
DiagnosticsEngine &Diags,
----------------
Can we name this differently, so it's obvious which is being called without
looking at the argument list? I suggest `ParsePreprocessorArgsImpl` for this
one, since it's doing the actual parsing.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp:3215-3216
+
+ return RoundTrip(Parse, Generate, Swap, Res, Args, Diags,
+ "PreprocessorOptions");
}
----------------
Have you considered just defining the lambdas inline in the call to
`RoundTrip`? I'm fine either way, but the way clang-format tends to clean this
up seems pretty readable to me, and the names don't really add much value since
they match the functions being called. Up to you.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95366/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95366
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
