<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Sam Clegg via Phabricator <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:reviews@reviews.llvm.org" target="_blank">reviews@reviews.llvm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">sbc100 added inline comments.<br>
<br>
<br>
================<br>
Comment at: lld/trunk/ELF/InputFiles.cpp:<wbr>609<br>
<span class="gmail-">+<br>
+  InputSectionBase *Sec = this->Sections[SecIdx];<br>
   uint8_t StOther = Sym->st_other;<br>
</span>----------------<br>
Why is inlining this better?  Isn't it generally considered better for comprehension to have smaller, well-named functions?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It depends. getSection was originally defined to be a public accessor to get a section, but later it was converted to a private function. In other member functions we don't use that function but directly access this->Sections, so keeping the function seemed odd to me.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Also, out of curiosity, why all use of  `this->` in this file?   Just a local coding style or some kind of ambiguity resolution?</blockquote><div><br></div><div>This code won't compile without `this->`. <a href="https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/templates#nondependent-name-lookup-members">https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/templates#nondependent-name-lookup-members</a></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail-HOEnZb"><div class="gmail-h5">
<br>
<br>
<br>
Repository:<br>
  rL LLVM<br>
<br>
<a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D41204" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://reviews.llvm.org/<wbr>D41204</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>