[PATCH] D130337: [pseudo] Eliminate multiple-specified-types ambiguities using guards

[Haojian Wu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

hokein added a comment.

The change looks good to me.

In D130337#3671575 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130337#3671575>, @sammccall wrote:

> LMK if anything else blocking here.

I don't want to block you, but I'd suggest postponing it a little bit until we collect some metrics in our internal pipeline (I think usaxena95@ is working on it, hopefully we will get it next week).

> I want to take a stab at changing the enums (cool idea), but I don't think there's much point blocking this patch on it.

Agree.

> Well, I don't think it's the most common (vs just targeting a rule or two) but certainly we never enumerate *all* the rules!
> Interesting idea.

If we look at the existing guard implementations, we have a few of these usages:

- in `isFunctionDeclarator`, we enumerate all rules of `noptr_declarator`, `ptr_declarator`, `declarator` ;
- in `hasExclusiveType`, we enumerate all rules of `decl_specifier`, `simple_type_specifier`, `type_specifier`, `type_specifier_seq` etc;


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D130337/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D130337