inclyc added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/FormatString.cpp:401
+ if (const auto *BT = argTy->getAs<BuiltinType>()) {
+ if (!Ptr) {
+ switch (BT->getKind()) {
----------------
nickdesaulniers wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > It's a bit strange that we have two switches over the same `BT->getKind()`
> > and the only difference is `!Ptr`; would it be easier to read if we
> > combined the two switches into one and had logic in the individual cases
> > for `Ptr` vs not `Ptr`?
> I almost made the same recommendation myself. For the below switch pair, and
> the pair above.
> It's a bit strange that we have two switches over the same `BT->getKind()`
> and the only difference is `!Ptr`; would it be easier to read if we combined
> the two switches into one and had logic in the individual cases for `Ptr` vs
> not `Ptr`?
These two switch pairs have different functions. The lower one is only
responsible for checking whether there is a signed or unsigned integer, and the
upper one is checking whether there is a promotion (or type confusing). Will
they be more difficult to understand if they are written together?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D132568/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D132568
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
