lebedev.ri added a comment.
Might have been better to not start landing until the all differentials are
understood/accepted, but i understand that it is not really up to me to decide.
Let's hope nothing in the next differentials will require changes to this
initial code :)
================
Comment at: clang-doc/BitcodeWriter.h:241
+/// \param I The info to emit to bitcode.
+template <typename T> void ClangDocBitcodeWriter::emitBlock(const T &I) {
+ StreamSubBlockGuard Block(Stream, MapFromInfoToBlockId<T>::ID);
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> OK, I don't get this at all.
>
> We have to declare emitBlockContent(NamespaceInfo) *and* the specialization
> of MapFromInfoToBlockId<NamespaceInfo>, and deal with the public interface
> emitBlock being a template function where you can't tell what's legal to
> pass, instead of writing:
>
> ```void emitBlock(const NamespaceInfo &I) {
> SubStreamBlockGuard Block(Stream, BI_NAMESPACE_BLOCK_ID); // <-- this one
> line
> ...
> }```
>
> This really seems like templates for the sake of templates :(
If you want to add a new block, in one case you just need to add one
```
template <> struct MapFromInfoToBlockId<???Info> {
static const BlockId ID = BI_???_BLOCK_ID;
};
```
In the other case you need to add whole
```
void ClangDocBitcodeWriter::emitBlock(const ???Info &I) {
StreamSubBlockGuard Block(Stream, BI_???_BLOCK_ID);
emitBlockContent(I);
}
```
(and it was even longer initially)
It seems just templating one static variable is shorter than duplicating
`emitBlock()` each time, no?
Do compare the current diff with the original diff state.
I *think* these templates helped move much of the duplication to simplify the
code overall.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D41102
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
