lemo added inline comments.
================
Comment at: source/Interpreter/CommandInterpreter.cpp:2708-2710
+ const char *data = str.data();
+ size_t size = str.size();
+ while (size > 0 && !WasInterrupted()) {
----------------
lemo wrote:
> lemo wrote:
> > clayborg wrote:
> > > Since we are using "llvm::StringRef" here, why not use its split
> > > functionality? Something like:
> > > ```
> > > bool done = false;
> > > while (!done) {
> > > auto pair = str.split('\n');
> > > auto len = pair.first.size();
> > > done = pair.second.empty();
> > > // Include newline if we are not done
> > > if (!done)
> > > ++len;
> > > stream.Write(pair.first.data(),
> > > }
> > > ```
> > >
> > > This approach also avoids the issue amccarth mentioned below about not
> > > ending with a newline. It is also quite a bit simpler to follow.
> > I'll give it a try, thanks for the suggestion.
> I forgot to reply to this: I tried using str.split() as suggested, with a
> small tweak to avoid reading past the end of the first slice (++len to
> include the '\n'):
>
> while (!str.empty() && !WasInterrupted()) {
> auto pair = str.split('\n');
> stream.Write(pair.first.data(), pair.first.size());
> if (str.size() != pair.first.size())
> stream.PutChar('\n');
> str = pair.second;
> }
> if (!str.empty()) {
> stream.Printf("\n... Interrupted.\n");
> }
>
> While this version is shorter there I see a number of small problems with it:
> 1. It requires a close look at the StringRef::split() interface (ex. done =
> pair.second.empty() is actually not the correct check since it will eat the
> final \n)
> 2. While conceptually straightforward, the StringRef::split() interface is
> not ideal in this case - see #1
> 3. This version assumes that stream.Write() actually writes everything (ie.
> not handling the return size)
> 4. In order to avoid reading past the end of the first slice we need to do a
> separate PutChar() for each \n
>
> So in the end I prefer the original version, which although a bit more
> verbose, tracks the invariants clearly, is potentially faster and handles
> strings regardless if they are terminated with \n or not.
Thoughts?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37923
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
