omtcyfz marked an inline comment as done.
================
Comment at: clang-rename/USRFindingAction.cpp:69
@@ -69,2 +68,3 @@
}
- USRs->insert(USRs->end(), USRSet.begin(), USRSet.end());
+ USRs.insert(USRs.end(), USRSet.begin(), USRSet.end());
+ return USRs;
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> Should USRs be a local variable now?
Can you elaborate please?
================
Comment at: clang-rename/USRFindingAction.h:38
@@ -37,5 +37,3 @@
private:
- unsigned SymbolOffset;
- std::string OldName;
- std::string SpellingName;
- std::vector<std::string> USRs;
+ const std::vector<unsigned> &SymbolOffsets;
+ const std::vector<std::string> &OldNames;
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> omtcyfz wrote:
> > Aw, you're right. Good catch, thanks!
> Reference members always seem suspicious to me. One has to be really really
> careful not to mess up lifetimes. Are we actually saving much but not copying
> these vectors?
Not really, they aren't meant to be quite huge. At this point I have ensured
the lifetimes, but if the code would be reused, I agree, it might cause some
trouble if one is not careful enough.
Do you propose to perform copying to gain more safety?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23651
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
