[Patch][ObjC][Proposal] NSValue literals

[jahanian]

Sorry, yes busy and vacation. Your patch looks good to me. I have a pending proposal which pretty much
describes what is implemented (with due credit :). Let’s wait for outcome of this proposal.

- Thanks, Fariborz

On Jan 17, 2015, at 1:44 PM, AlexDenisov <1101.debian at gmail.com> wrote:

> I guess you’re busy with the next LLVM/Clang release, but just want to know how is it going with this patch.
> Let me know if I can help somehow.
> -- 
> AlexDenisov
> Software Engineer, https://github.com/AlexDenisov
> 
> On 10 Jan 2015 at 11:12:39, AlexDenisov (1101.debian at gmail.com) wrote:
> 
>> Here is new version, without pointers.
>> 
>> -- 
>> AlexDenisov
>> Software Engineer, https://github.com/AlexDenisov
>> 
>> On 9 Jan 2015 at 20:14:47, jahanian (fjahanian at apple.com) wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> We may not support boxing of any pointer types after all 
>>> (as the underlying API does not manage the collected object).
>>> So, final patch may need to address that. Please provide more tests 
>>> for NSEdgeInsets and specifically, see that diagnostics come out when 
>>> deployment target does not support it.
>>> Otherwise, patch looks good. Please hang on to the patch until we have gone through
>>> the language review process.
>>> 
>>> - Thanks, Fairborz
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Jan 6, 2015, at 10:23 AM, AlexDenisov <1101.debian at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Thank you for response. 
>>>> I already sent another patch, it could be found here: 
>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.scm/114023
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> AlexDenisov
>>>> Software Engineer, https://github.com/AlexDenisov
>>>> 
>>>> On 5 Jan 2015 at 19:39:16, jahanian (fjahanian at apple.com) wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Dec 24, 2014, at 3:29 AM, AlexDenisov <1101.debian at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Do the usual lookup to find the method which implements this syntax. Call Decl::getAvailability on this method. If it returns
>>>>>>> anything other than AvailabilityResult::AR_Available 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Well, I understand this part, it’s pretty obvious. But what I don’t understand is:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> issue an appropriate diagnostic.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What is appropriate diagnostic for AR_NotYetIntroduced?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Should I introduce this diagnostic? Or just show warning/error for Deprecated/Unavailable and ignore NotYetIntroduced AR?
>>>>> 
>>>>> It is sufficient to issue an unavailability diagnostics since diagnostic points to the method which has the availability info. as part of its declaration.
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Fariborz

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20150119/51904ae4/attachment.html>