whisperity added a comment.
In D110614#3032818 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D110614#3032818>, @carlosgalvezp
wrote:
> Moved the condition of public-virtual / protected-non-virtual to the check
> stage instead of the match stage. This way is more similar to the equivalent
> Sema check and it passes all the tests. Let me know what you think!
I'll let @aaron.ballman take a look at how well the test coverage increased,
this is a drive-by comment from my part due to being a bit too busy. I'll look
at this at a later point, hopefully still this week!
Either way, you could create your own local matcher predicate function and use
it as a submatcher, so you can do the test during matching instead of checking.
Adding
AST_MATCHER(Decl, myFancyMatcher) {
return Node.something();
}
to the code will give you `myFancyMatcher()`, which you can embed. First
parameter is the node type you want to match on. Inside the `{ }` you are
essentially within a function's scope, so you can write arbitrary code,
returning true is you want to match.
If you check the AST Matcher library header, it uses this same macro
extensively. Perhaps you could check how the `isVirtual` matcher is implemented
there?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D110614/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D110614
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
