[llvm-commits] [llvm] r164813 - /llvm/trunk/include/llvm/Operator.h

[David Blaikie]

On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:22 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Oh, I see, this is an intermediate abstract class? I didn't test that
>> case, I was just directly instantiating the class I was testing.
>>
>> OK, now I'm confused by this Operator type. How is it useful? If the
>> ctor is deleted then no derived type could ever be instantiated, could
>> it? So why would these be types at all instead of collections of
>> static utility functions?
>
> There isn't any good reason other than historical precedent; this code
> has been around for a very long time.

Good to know & Benjamin explained some of the details on IRC. A battle
for another day, it seems. (taking bets on how long it'll be before
Richard Smith finds this with -fcatch-undefined-behavior)

- David