ilya-biryukov added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D45815#1073581, @nik wrote:
> Hmm, that indicates that template function bodies are actually not that > dominant, which I also haven't thought. Now I'm doubting the correctness of > my patch/tests. The numbers are definitely interesting, we need to double-check if that it's the case. But they definitely make a good point for including this option. It seems Qt and LLVM are exactly the types of codebases where skipping the templates doesn't bring much value, as most of the code is not templated. On the other hand, skipping inline function might potentially be a win for those. I'm still tempted to say that we should either skip all bodies or none of them to keep the code simpler, but I see why having errors from template instantiations is preferable. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D45815 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
