[cfe-dev] RFC: Easier AST Matching by Default

[Stephen Kelly via cfe-dev]

On 02/07/2020 12:23, Manuel Klimek wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 12:50 PM Aaron Ballman via cfe-dev 
> <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>
>     > I don't want to be left with the blame of having my design
>     half-implemented though :). There are bugs that I can not fix,
>     partly because this is not concluded.
>     >
>     > If I can't move forward, then reversal is the only way (to give
>     others the space to validate their designs) and I'd like to do
>     that soon, so that this thread is not an open item for me (or
>     anyone else) to deal with.
>
>     While I was previously in favor of switching the default because I
>     thought it would lead to easier AST matching, I've been convinced by
>     the concerns raised on the thread and I think that we should revert
>     the default to AsIs. Despite that, Stephen: thank you for all your
>     efforts on this and I'm sorry that the experiment hasn't worked out
>     the way we had anticipated.
>
>
> +1 - I think it was mainly too early to flip the default - we need to 
> iterate on the mode (or an alternative, like what Richard and others 
> suggested) before we try to flip defaults again.

The change is here ready for review:

https://reviews.llvm.org/D83076

Sorry about the churn of introducing the change of default. At least 
traverse() matchers introduced then will continue to work without 
requiring extra churn.

Thanks,

Stephen.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20200702/8c5ea5b6/attachment.html>