dang added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/ExtractAPI/ExtractAPIConsumer.cpp:245
+ if (const auto *SuperClassDecl = Decl->getSuperClass()) {
+ SuperClass.Name = SuperClassDecl->getObjCRuntimeNameAsString();
+ SuperClass.USR = API.recordUSR(SuperClassDecl);
----------------
dang wrote:
> dang wrote:
> > zixuw wrote:
> > > dang wrote:
> > > > Shouldn't we be recording this string in the StringAllocator for reuse
> > > > later. I have a patch in progress for macro support that will do the
> > > > serialization once the AST isn't available anymore so we really
> > > > shouldn't be taking in StringRefs for stuff in the AST.
> > > Right but that only makes sense once we kill the AST before serialization
> > > right? I mean I'm happy to wrap these in `copyString` now if we know for
> > > sure that we're doing that in a later patch. But it feels beyond the
> > > scope of this particular patch. Especially that we'd also need to go
> > > through the previous code to copy the names of global records, enums,
> > > etc. anyway.
> > >
> > > I feel like that the change to surface `APISet` and punt serialization
> > > should be separated out from the macro change. And we can wrap all the
> > > name strings in that patch so that it's a meaningful atomic commit.
> > Yeah sounds good!
> I have looked into it a bit more and the ASTContext will still be live at
> that point (it gets deallocated right after we will be doing the
> serialization) so this is fine.
I thought it would still make sense to split the macro patch in two so here we
go: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122648
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D122446/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D122446
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
