[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] C++11 reverse iterators (was C++11 is here)

[Richard Smith]

This rule does not seem to be widely followed by Clang today. Looking at
Parser and Sema, many getters (0 argument functions with names matching
/^get[A-Z]/) return mutable references to long-lived objects. Looking
through Decl.h, things are a little different: we rarely return references,
but do frequently return pointers that provide mutable access to contained
objects.


On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote:

>
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote:
>
>> Ok, can this be generalized into guidance we can put in the coding
>> standards?
>
>
> I mean, maybe. I'm not sure it comes up frequently enough to be worth
> space.
>
> My off-the-cuff idea of how to say this in the guide would be:
>
> """
> When providing getters and setters in APIs they should generally have
> value semantics: the returned object from a getter should be immutable or a
> copy, and arguments to the setter should be copied into the object.
> Naturally, if the member is itself a pointer, this applies to the pointer
> and not the pointee. If you are providing access to contained objects
> through some transparent view like iterators, ranges, or adaptors these
> should have reference semantics and be distinct from either a getter or a
> setter.
> """
>
> But this isn't terribly satisfying to me as a rule. It's much easier to
> talk in context about specific APIs than provide this level of guidance IMO.
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140304/fb207a28/attachment.html>