[lldb-dev] [RFC] Adding a clang-style LLVM.h (or, "Are you tired of typing 'llvm::' everywhere ?")
Larry D'Anna via lldb-dev
lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Oct 7 17:45:36 PDT 2019
Pavel Labath said
> some llvm classes, are so well-known and widely used, that qualifying
> them with "llvm::" serves no useful purpose and only adds visual noise.
> I'm thinking here mainly of ADT classes like String/ArrayRef,
> Optional/Error, etc. I propose we stop explicitly qualifying these classes.
> We can implement this proposal the same way as clang solved the same
> problem, which is by creating a special LLVM.h
> header in the Utility library. This header would adopt these classes
> into the lldb_private namespace via a series of forward and "using"
> I think clang's LLVM.h is contains a well-balanced collection of adopted
> classes, and it should cover the most widely-used classes in lldb too,
> so I propose we use that as a starting point.
I think this is a great idea, particularly for llvm::Expected. The signatures of functions
using Expected arer kind of noisy already, and adding llvm:: doesn’t help.
Anyone object to this idea?
More information about the lldb-dev