Lekensteyn added a comment.
By the way, I think that `long double` is less common than long unsigned
literals, so changing unsigned to uint64_t might be something more important?
================
Comment at: include/clang/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Parser.h:25
/// <Boolean> := true | false
+/// <Double> := 1.0 | 2e-3 | 3.45e67
/// <Unsigned> := [0-9]+
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> It'd be good to list the actual grammar rather than a few examples.
I am concerned that listing a very precise grammar actually makes this less
readable (see also the StringLiteral example).
If a grammar is used instead, how about this:
<Double> := [0-9]+.[0-9]* | [0-9]+.[0-9]*[eE][-+]?[0-9]+
================
Comment at: include/clang/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/VariantValue.h:335
unsigned Unsigned;
+ double Double;
bool Boolean;
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> This may or may not be a good idea, but do we want to put the values into an
> APFloat rather than a double? My concern with double is that (0) it may be
> subtly different if the user wants a 16- or 32-bit float explicitly, (1) it
> won't be able to represent long double values, or quad double.
>
> I'm thinking this value could be passed directly from the C++ API as an
> APFloat, float, or double, or provided using a StringRef for the dynamic API.
(32-bit) double values are a superset of (16-bit) float values, that should be
OK.
Long doubles are possible in the AST (e.g. for `0.1L`), but neither C11 nor
C++14 seem to define a quad double literal type (so that should be of a lesser
concern).
Reasons why I chose for double instead of APFloat:
- `strtod` is readily available and does not abort the program. By contrast,
`APFloat(StringRef)` trips on assertions if the input is invalid.
- I was not sure if the APFloat class can be used in an union.
================
Comment at: lib/ASTMatchers/Dynamic/Parser.cpp:180
/// \brief Consume an unsigned literal.
void consumeUnsignedLiteral(TokenInfo *Result) {
+ bool isFloatingLiteral = false;
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> This function should be renamed and the comment updated.
How does "consumeNumberLiteral" sound?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33135
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
