lichray added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/charconv:244
+ static _LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY char const*
+ read(char const* __p, char const* __ep, type& __a, type& __b)
+ {
----------------
mclow.lists wrote:
> Same comment as above about `read` and `inner_product` - they need to be
> "ugly names"
Unlike `traits` which is a template parameter name in the standard, `read` and
`inner_product` are function names in the standard, which means the users
cannot make a macro for them (and there is no guarantee about what name you
make **not** get by including certain headers), so we don't need to use ugly
names here, am I right?
================
Comment at: include/charconv:358
+
+ auto __gen_digit = [](_Tp __c) {
+ return "0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz"[__c];
----------------
mclow.lists wrote:
> I just want you to reassure me here - this lambda gets inlined, right?
Yes -- I read my code in assembly.
================
Comment at: include/charconv:359
+ auto __gen_digit = [](_Tp __c) {
+ return "0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz"[__c];
+ };
----------------
mclow.lists wrote:
> Thinking some more - did this used to do more? Because I don't see why having
> a lambda here is a benefit, as compared to:
>
> const char *__digits = "0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz";
>
> and
> *--p = digits[__c];
>
I use a lambda here because it may do more in the future. If someone wants to
let it support non-ASCII platforms, then they only need to make a patch against
this lambda rather than changing the sites of uses. After all, there is
nothing wrong to abstract out anything into a function, I think...
Repository:
rCXX libc++
https://reviews.llvm.org/D41458
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
