clayborg added a comment. Or do we
In D69820#1817768 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69820#1817768>, @xiaobai wrote: > In D69820#1817621 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69820#1817621>, @clayborg wrote: > > > Let me know what everyone thinks of adding a "fully_qualified" argument to > > the TypeSystem::GetClassName()? > > > I think that you would have to add more than a `fully_qualified` argument to > the method. You need to reference the parent `ValueObject` to fully qualify > something as far as I can tell, so you'd have to pass along the parent as > well. I think that it sounds nice for the `TypeSystem` to fully qualify the > class name but I don't think that it's necessarily better than what exists > now. You'll still have recursion walking the parent `ValueObject`s, you've > just split it across two different methods in different classes. Maybe I'm > overthinking this or missing something though? Just for the type I am saying. Get the fully qualified name of the type. That should be all built into the type in the type system as well right? So no other value would need to be used, just ask the CompilerType for its fully qualified name. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69820/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69820 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
