[PATCH] D36156: [rename] Introduce symbol occurrences

Haojian Wu via Phabricator via cfe-commits cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Aug 14 07:25:27 PDT 2017


hokein added inline comments.


================
Comment at: lib/Tooling/Refactoring/Rename/SymbolOccurrences.cpp:17
+
+SymbolOccurrence::SymbolOccurrence(const SymbolName &Name, OccurrenceKind Kind,
+                                   ArrayRef<SourceLocation> Locations)
----------------
arphaman wrote:
> hokein wrote:
> > Shouldn't the definition be in clang::tooling namespace?
> That's not necessary because of the `using namespace` directives above. Only standalone functions have to be defined in namespaces, out-of-line member function definitions don't have to follow that rule because they already have the class qualifier.
Ah, I see, thanks for the explanation. The constructor actually lives in "SymbolOccurrence". T

I'd like to use a more familiar way: `namespace clang { namespace tooling { ... } }` 


================
Comment at: lib/Tooling/Refactoring/Rename/USRLocFinder.cpp:398
   Visitor.TraverseDecl(Decl);
-  return Visitor.getLocationsFound();
+  return std::move(Visitor.getOccurrences());
 }
----------------
arphaman wrote:
> hokein wrote:
> > I think just returning `Visitor.getOccurrences()` is sufficient -- compiler can handle it well, also using std::move would prevent copy elision.
> I'm returning by non-const reference from `getOccurrences`, so the compiler copies by default. I have to move either here or return by value from `getOccurrences` and move there. We also have warnings for redundant `std::move`, and they don't fire here.
Ok, didn't notice that `getOccurance()` returns non-const reference.

I think the method `getOccurances` may have potential effect -- the clients could change the Occurences member variable of USRLocFindingASTVisitor, after getting the non-const reference.

Another option is to rename `getOccurances` to `takeOccurrences` and return by value:

```
SymbolOccurrences takeOccurrences() { return std::move(Occurrences); }
```

What do you think?


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D36156





More information about the cfe-commits mailing list