aaron.ballman added a comment. In D149650#4315211 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D149650#4315211>, @sammccall wrote:
> In D149650#4312389 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D149650#4312389>, @aaron.ballman > wrote: > >> I guess I'm not seeing much motivation for this change. We already have >> `clang::getNullabilitySpelling()` and `const StreamingDiagnostic >> &clang::operator<<(const StreamingDiagnostic &DB, DiagNullabilityKind >> nullability)` and now we're adding a third way to get this information. If >> this is just for debug/testing purposes, can we use existing debug >> formatters to convert the enumeration value into the enumerator name instead? > > We're using NullabilityKind in our dataflow-based null-safety clang-tidy > check <https://github.com/google/crubit/tree/main/nullability> that we hope > to upstream when it works. Ah, good to know! I think it would be reasonable to add this functionality once there's some agreement on adding the clang-tidy check. > (The idea is to use `_Nullable` and `_Nonnull` annotations on API boundaries > to gradually type pointers, and to provide a verification clang-tidy check > and libraries to infer annotations for existing code. The actual clang-tidy > check wrapper isn't in that repo yet, but it's trivial). > > It would be convenient if e.g. EXPECT_THAT(someVectorOfNK, > ElementsAre(Nullable, Unspecified)) > <https://github.com/google/crubit/blob/main/nullability/type_nullability_test.cc> > printed something useful when it fails, if we could write OS << NK and get > Unspecified rather than OS << getSpelling(NK) and get > _Unspecified_Nullability, etc. > This doesn't concern clang core (ha, there are no unit tests...) but there's > no reasonable way to do this downstream without using a different type. Hmmm, but does this need to be added to `Specifiers.h` instead of being kept packaged up with clang-tidy? For things like AST matchers, we usually ask that the matcher remain local to the clang-tidy check unless the same matcher is needed in multiple checks. This feels somewhat similar, despite it not being related to AST matching -- if the only need for this functionality exists out of the clang tree, can we keep it out of the clang tree until we find more needs? >> `StreamingDiagnostic &clang::operator<<` > > This actually wants the user-visible spelling, so I think it can just use > getSpelling... if I make that change we're back to just two implementations > :-) Oh, I really like those changes! Feel free to land that as an NFC change if you'd like (the addition of quotes is a bug fix, but not really a functional change). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D149650/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D149650 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits