On Nov 29, 2007, at 1:57 AM, pawel kunio wrote:
> As to the tabs and 80 char limit, already applied.
Thanks!
> Regarding the
> patch, I'd say I'd rather stick
> to the assert(0 && "Unknown 'subtype' instruction in Value
> destructor");
> The reason is two-fold, 1. Some of the Value inherited class could
> have escaped my searches
> and 2. We will be able to enforce more strictly the destroyThis method
> pattern in newly added
> Value inherited classes.
> What do You think?
I'm ok with either one. Note that they will both enforce the
property for new classes. If you have:
if (..)
...
else if (...)
..
else
assert(0 && "bad");
This will assert if none of the if's above match. Likewise, if you
have:
if (..)
...
else
cast<sometype>(this)
The cast in the 'else' case will abort if 'this' doesn't match sometype.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
llvm-commits mailing list
llvm-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
