[llvm-dev] [RFC] Should we add isa_or_null<>?

[Aaron Ballman via llvm-dev]

Personally, I find having a named predicate clearly expresses intent,
especially for the few cases where we found an expression of the
pattern: foo() && isa<Whatever>(foo()).

~Aaron

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 1:52 AM Sean Silva via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> +1 on not adding the new API
>
> On Sat, May 4, 2019, 11:51 AM David Blaikie via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>> +1, if we're voting. I don't think it adds to the readability of code
>> for me personally.
>>
>> On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 11:47 AM Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019, 02:37 David Chisnall via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 22/04/2019 15:15, Don Hinton via llvm-dev wrote:
>> >> > Although there were a few no votes, it looks like there's a consensus
>> >> > for adding a `isa_and_nonnull` type operator.  While there were some who
>> >> > preferred `isa_nonnull`, it wasn't overwhelming, and since
>> >> > `isa_and_nonnull` is already committed, I'm going to leave it as
>> >> > `isa_and_nonnull` for the time being.
>> >>
>> >> Maybe I missed something, but it looked to me as if the consensus was
>> >> that `isa_and_some_words<T>(foo)` imposed a higher cognitive load on the
>> >> reader than `foo && isa<T>(foo)`, as well as being more to type in most
>> >> cases, so wasn't worth adding.
>> >
>> >
>> > FWIW, I agree with this and Bogner: this doesn't seem like an improvement worth the cost.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> David
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > LLVM Developers mailing list
>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev