[llvm-commits] [lld] r172512 - in /lld/trunk: include/lld/Core/range.h unittests/CMakeLists.txt unittests/RangeTest.cpp

[Michael Spencer]

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:08 AM, John McCall <rjmccall at apple.com> wrote:

> On Mar 22, 2013, at 2:27 AM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:53 PM, John McCall <rjmccall at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 14, 2013, at 10:55 PM, Michael J. Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Author: mspencer
>> > Date: Tue Jan 15 00:55:25 2013
>> > New Revision: 172512
>> >
>> > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=172512&view=rev
>> > Log:
>> > [Core] Add iterator ranges.
>> >
>> > This is based on code by Jeffrey Yasskin. It has been modified to
>> compile
>> > with MSVC and reformated to LLVM style.
>>
>> Very late comment, I know, but this seems like a reasonable addition to
>> LLVM's ADT library, especially if it can be adapted to at least allow
>> instantiation
>> under C++03.  We've been talking for some time about allowing non-core
>> LLVM
>> subsystems (like the static analyzer) use C++11, and of course there are
>> tons of
>> external projects that are free to use C++11 as they like.  LLVM and
>> Clang have
>> a *lot* of types with "tagged" iterators, like llvm::Value::use_iterator
>> and
>> clang::DeclContext::decl_iterator;  with this class in-tree, it would
>> become very
>> straightforward to start adding range adapters to a lot of those
>> interfaces.
>> That would be a pretty nice enhancement to get in for the 3.3 release.
>>
>> John.
>>
>
> I originally intended to port as much as possible to C++03 and stick it in
> LLVM ADT, but there were concerns with adopting this specific API as it may
> be significantly different from what gets standardized in C++1y.
>
> I'm in favor of some support for the range concept in LLVM, even if it's
> just a begin/end pair.
>
>
> Yeah, I think a range<T> that just pairs a begin and end iterator and lets
> you
> iterate over it with the C++11 for-range syntax would provide roughly 99%
> of
> the utility of the more general thing.
>
> Do you want to handle this, or should I just sketch out a range with zero
> bells
> and whistles and commit it?
>
> John.
>

I won't have time until late next week. I can do it then, but I'm also fine
with you handling it.

- Michael Spencer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20130322/beafd7a0/attachment.html>