Pavel Labath said > some llvm classes, are so well-known and widely used, that qualifying > them with "llvm::" serves no useful purpose and only adds visual noise. > I'm thinking here mainly of ADT classes like String/ArrayRef, > Optional/Error, etc. I propose we stop explicitly qualifying these classes. > > We can implement this proposal the same way as clang solved the same > problem, which is by creating a special LLVM.h > <https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang/blob/master/include/clang/Basic/LLVM.h> > header in the Utility library. This header would adopt these classes > into the lldb_private namespace via a series of forward and "using" > declarations. > > I think clang's LLVM.h is contains a well-balanced collection of adopted > classes, and it should cover the most widely-used classes in lldb too, > so I propose we use that as a starting point.
I think this is a great idea, particularly for llvm::Expected. The signatures of functions using Expected arer kind of noisy already, and adding llvm:: doesn’t help. Anyone object to this idea? _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
