EquivalenceClasses: Make ECValue public. NFC

[ruiling]

Expose the inner class so that we can explicitly write the type outside the parent class.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-adt

Author: Ruiling, Song (ruiling)

Changes

Expose the inner class so that we can explicitly write the type outside the parent class.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139689.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) llvm/include/llvm/ADT/EquivalenceClasses.h (+2)

diff --git a/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/EquivalenceClasses.h b/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/EquivalenceClasses.h
index fed012ce56005..b1009f8b49992 100644
--- a/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/EquivalenceClasses.h
+++ b/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/EquivalenceClasses.h
@@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ namespace llvm {
 ///   5 1 2
 ///
 template <class ElemTy> class EquivalenceClasses {
+public:
   /// ECValue - The EquivalenceClasses data structure is just a set of these.
   /// Each of these represents a relation for a value.  First it stores the
   /// value itself. Next, it provides a "next pointer", which is used to
@@ -122,6 +123,7 @@ template <class ElemTy> class EquivalenceClasses {
     }
   };
 
+private:
   /// TheMapping - This implicitly provides a mapping from ElemTy values to the
   /// ECValues, it just keeps the key as part of the value.
   DenseMap<ElemTy, ECValue *> TheMapping;

[fhahn]

Can you share why this is needed? ECValue is intentionally not exposed publicly as it is an internal implementation detail

[arsenm]

It's directly referenced in public members so I don't see how it can't be public

[ruiling]

Can you share why this is needed? ECValue is intentionally not exposed publicly as it is an internal implementation detail

See the discussion at #137784 (comment). Using explicit type EquivalenceClasses<SUnit *>::ECValue * is clearer and it depends on making the inner class public.