The new wording cannot be construed as suggesting the use of
SmallVectorImpl<T> as e.g. a class member (just because the class
happens to be in an interface).
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@177778
91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-
96231b3b80d8
.. note::
- Prefer to use ``SmallVectorImpl<T>`` in interfaces.
+ Prefer to use ``SmallVectorImpl<T>`` as a parameter type.
In APIs that don't care about the "small size" (most?), prefer to use
the ``SmallVectorImpl<T>`` class, which is basically just the "vector