[cfe-dev] declspec(property...) advice

[Eric Niebler]

(Resurrecting this old thread for a quick confirmation...)

On 12/9/2010 1:16 AM, Douglas Gregor wrote:
> On Dec 8, 2010, at 9:56 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
>> I'm currently working on getting the front-end to eat Microsoft's 
>> __declspec(property...) extension.
<snip>
> 
> There should be an entirely different kind of Decl for these
> properties, because they really have nothing to do with fields once
> we've gotten past their syntax. It'll be a subclass of ValueDecl,
> much like IndirectFieldDecl or ObjCPropertyDecl.

Doug, we've followed your advice and put our property decls (MS and
Borland) under DeclaratorDecl (which is a ValueDecl).

However, we notice that ObjCPropertyDecl is *not* a ValueDecl. It's
merely a NamedDecl. Is that wrong? We don't propose changing it, we just
want to make sure that making MS and Borland properties are in their
rightful place in the decl hierarchy.

TIA,

-- 
Eric Niebler
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 551 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20110308/b3c7b593/attachment.sig>