cor3ntin added a comment.
In D153536#4474733 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D153536#4474733>, @dblaikie wrote:
> Maybe try testing with more different values, to demonstrate which entities
> the debugger is finding?
>
> int _ = 1;
> int _ = 2;
> {
> int _ = 3;
> int _ = 7;
> }
>
> Or something like that. But, honestly, if the point is that these variables
> should be unnameable - perhaps we shouldn't generate any DWARF for them?
The variables should still be inspectable, ideally. It's true it makes no sense
to be able to use them in expressions, and maybe if lldb use clang to evaluate
expressions that would just work?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D153536/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D153536
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
