labath accepted this revision.
labath added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Being more resilient when handling demangler outputs seems like a good thing,
but I think it is important to understand what made the demangler produce that
output in the first place, to make sure we aren't missing anything.
Also, I think I found one more possible issue with this code.
================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Language/CPlusPlus/CPlusPlusNameParser.cpp:199
case tok::greatergreater:
template_counter -= 2;
can_open_template = false;
----------------
While looking at the bug, this part here struck me as dubious.
Can you check that this properly handles a name like `F<(3)>>(1)> f<3, 1>()`
(which is the demangled form of _Z1fILi3ELi1EE1FIXrsT_T0_EEv).
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42939
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
