[cfe-dev] Decls are not synonyms for the symbols they represent
Argiris Kirtzidis
akyrtzi at gmail.com
Tue Sep 16 18:52:36 PDT 2008
Argiris Kirtzidis wrote:
>
> What do you think about the idea of going back to single RecordDecls
> and using DeclGroups to represent the above example ?
>
> struct s; -> typespecifier ';' -> DeclGroup with TypeSpecifier
> referencing 's' and empty declaration list
> struct s { int a; }; -> typespecifier ';' -> DeclGroup with
> TypeSpecifier defining 's' and empty declaration list
>
> And only one RecordDecl will be created for 's'.
>
> Or maybe make it more explicit by introducing a TypeSpecDecl for these
> constructs.
Also, by having only TypeSpecifiers own RecordDecls, the ownership model
for RecordDecls is more consistent that an ownership model where
sometimes a TypeSpecifier owns a RecordDecl and other times it's the
translation unit.
-Argiris
More information about the cfe-dev
mailing list