[cfe-commits] [PATCH] AST matchers

[David Blaikie]

On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>> CamelCase is fine for these. I notice that there's some inconsistency with
>> 'has' names, e.g., hasDescendant vs. HasType.
>
>
> Update: Chandler voted for using llvm coding style (and I agree). The
> argument is that the callable classes we have are just classes to work
> around missing variadic templates and that they will become functions anyway
> once we get C++11 into llvm (in a future, far, far away).

Actually - this is a layer on top of Clang the compiler, so why
wouldn't it just use C++11? It doesn't have the same constraints of
buildability with host compilers as the compiler does - you can always
just compile this with Clang.

- David