[lldb-dev] RFC: Break/Watchpoint refactor

[Sean Callanan via lldb-dev]

The issue I have with the DISALLOW_ macro is that when you're looking to see what sort of constructors etc. are possible, you now have to look through a macro.  Personally, I like to see what constructors are available on an object in one list, and not have to guess about whether e.g. a move constructor is present or disallowed.

Sean

> On Sep 27, 2016, at 3:24 PM, Jim Ingham <jingham at apple.com> wrote:
> 
> Why?  The macro states the intent explicitly, rather than having to deduce it from details scattered through the class definition.
> 
> Jim
> 
>> On Sep 27, 2016, at 3:13 PM, Sean Callanan via lldb-dev <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> Doing it everywhere would be a public service IMO.  I don't like macros either.
>> 
>> Sean
>> 
>>> On Sep 27, 2016, at 3:07 PM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> FWIW LLVM removed all it's disallow copy / assign macros in favor of explicitly writing it.  I agree it's easier to just change the macro, but I would just do what LLVM does as long as you don't mind the extra work.
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 3:01 PM Daniel Austin Noland via lldb-dev <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 09/27/2016 03:37 PM, Enrico Granata wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Sep 27, 2016, at 1:09 PM, Daniel Austin Noland via lldb-dev <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> * Prefer explicitly deleted copy ctor / assignments over multiline macro DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Why not just move DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN over to using =delete ? That seems like a trivial change..
>>> 
>>> That was my first thought as well.  Still, I personally try to avoid macros.  On the other hand that one is simple enough that it may be justified.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> - Enrico
>>>> 📩 egranata@.com <about:blank> ☎️ 27683
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lldb-dev mailing list
>>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lldb-dev mailing list
>>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev <http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> lldb-dev mailing list
>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20160927/2facf1b3/attachment.html>