[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D87675: [lldb/DWARF] Refactor to prefer emplace_back() vs. push_back()

[Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits]

labath added a comment.

Using emplacement instead of construction is a good idea, where it makes sense. However, I am not convinced that adding constructors to otherwise-trivial structures is worth it. These structures are usually trivially copyable and/or movable and so an emplacement does not really save much.

And I am definitely sure that the constructors we do add should be taking (lvalue) references -- that precludes construction with anything other than an lvalue, which is just weird. They also force at least one copy, whereas a equivalent (properly written) push_back call could use no copies.

So, I'd just limit this patch to the cases where one does not need to add additional constructors to make emplace_back work.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D87675/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D87675