aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Basic/CharInfo.h:199-200 + return "\\t"; + case '\v': + return "\\v"; + } ---------------- lichray wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > We're also missing `\?` right? > `?` does not seem to need `"escaping?"` It's the only simple escape sequence we're not handling here: http://eel.is/c++draft/lex.literal#nt:simple-escape-sequence-char (You need to escape `?` thanks to trigraphs. Consider a string literal like `"This does what now??!"`.) ================ Comment at: clang/lib/AST/APValue.cpp:676-683 + if (Ty->isWideCharType()) + Out << 'L'; + else if (Ty->isChar8Type()) + Out << "u8"; + else if (Ty->isChar16Type()) + Out << 'u'; + else if (Ty->isChar32Type()) ---------------- lichray wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > Not quite the same thing, but do we have to worry about printing pascal > > strings here? (e.g., do we need to do `"\pwhatever"`? > This is in `APValue` where we lost the context of StringLiteral; nothing > tells me that this array was created from a Pascal string literal. Unless you > want to do some heuristics, like printing `"\pthis"` when seens an `unsigned > char[6]` where the first element = 4 (last element = 0 is checked at the > beginning). Whelp, that explains that. I think the current behavior is fine (I have to imagine the number of people still using Pascal strings is as high as four or five these days). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D115031/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D115031 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
