[cfe-dev] declspec(property...) advice

[Douglas Gregor]

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 8, 2011, at 2:28 AM, Eric Niebler <eric at boostpro.com> wrote:

> (Resurrecting this old thread for a quick confirmation...)
> 
> On 12/9/2010 1:16 AM, Douglas Gregor wrote:
>> On Dec 8, 2010, at 9:56 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
>>> I'm currently working on getting the front-end to eat Microsoft's 
>>> __declspec(property...) extension.
> <snip>
>> 
>> There should be an entirely different kind of Decl for these
>> properties, because they really have nothing to do with fields once
>> we've gotten past their syntax. It'll be a subclass of ValueDecl,
>> much like IndirectFieldDecl or ObjCPropertyDecl.
> 
> Doug, we've followed your advice and put our property decls (MS and
> Borland) under DeclaratorDecl (which is a ValueDecl).
> 
> However, we notice that ObjCPropertyDecl is *not* a ValueDecl. It's
> merely a NamedDecl. Is that wrong?

Yes. ObjC has a few oddities like this. 

> We don't propose changing it, we just
> want to make sure that making MS and Borland properties are in their
> rightful place in the decl hierarchy.

You are on the right track with DeclaratorDecl. 

  
> TIA,
> 
> -- 
> Eric Niebler
> BoostPro Computing
> http://www.boostpro.com
>