[LLVMdev] [RFC] Add empty() method to iterator_range.

[Chandler Carruth]

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Lang Hames <lhames at gmail.com> wrote:

> This is easy to punt (and I won't be especially bothered if that's what we
> do), but it also seems like it would be easy to implement our own version
> (llvm::is_empty?) and replace it when the committee decides on something,
> the same way we did with llvm::move?


Well, llvm::move is quite different -- the path forward for the standard
was *very* clear at that point, so the committee had already decided, we
just didn't have access to it yet.


> Is there any reason not to follow that approach?


It runs the risk of setting precedent both within LLVM and within the
larger community. :: shrug ::
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140321/5b3b44da/attachment.html>