hokein added a comment. The change looks good to me.
In D130337#3671575 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130337#3671575>, @sammccall wrote: > LMK if anything else blocking here. I don't want to block you, but I'd suggest postponing it a little bit until we collect some metrics in our internal pipeline (I think usaxena95@ is working on it, hopefully we will get it next week). > I want to take a stab at changing the enums (cool idea), but I don't think > there's much point blocking this patch on it. Agree. > Well, I don't think it's the most common (vs just targeting a rule or two) > but certainly we never enumerate *all* the rules! > Interesting idea. If we look at the existing guard implementations, we have a few of these usages: - in `isFunctionDeclarator`, we enumerate all rules of `noptr_declarator`, `ptr_declarator`, `declarator` ; - in `hasExclusiveType`, we enumerate all rules of `decl_specifier`, `simple_type_specifier`, `type_specifier`, `type_specifier_seq` etc; Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D130337/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D130337 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
