labath marked 2 inline comments as done. labath added inline comments.
================ Comment at: include/lldb/Utility/FileSpec.h:250 + /// unreliable (e.g. "c:\foo.txt" is a valid relative posix path). + static llvm::Optional<Style> GuessPathStyle(llvm::StringRef path); + ---------------- amccarth wrote: > Given that this implementation is limited to absolute paths ... should it be > in such a general purpose class? > > If so, maybe this restriction be made more obvious by naming the parameter > `absolute_path`. Then people who just look at the signature without reading > the comments, or who get a prompt in their IDE are more likely to note the > limitation. Do you have an idea where to place it? Theoretically I could put it into the base SymbolFile class, since all existing users are SymbolFiles, but I am not sure if that makes things any better. Renaming the arg to `absolute_path` sounds good. ================ Comment at: source/Utility/FileSpec.cpp:375 + return Style::windows; + return llvm::None; +} ---------------- amccarth wrote: > The code this replaces was returning `Style::native` rather than > `Style::None`. I'm not sure if that will have any implications. It terms of functionality, it doesn't, since all users then do `getValueOr(Style::native)`. But I am not sure what's the impact on readability -- it seemed better to have a more explicit value for "I don't know" in such a general API, but since all users just revert to native when they can't guess (and I'm not sure if there's anything better they could do), maybe going through `Optional` is overkill. I'd be happy to change it if you think that's better. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D57895/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D57895 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
