mib added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Language/CPlusPlus/LibCxx.cpp:637
if (location_sp->GetName() == g_size_name)
- location_sp = short_sp->GetChildAtIndex(3, true);
+ location_sp = short_sp->GetChildAtIndex(2, true);
if (using_bitmasks)
----------------
mib wrote:
> aprantl wrote:
> > Let me know if I',m misunderstanding what the code is doing, but this looks
> > like it is replacing the previous implementation? Ideally we would detect
> > the layout and then parse it correctly depending on which version we're
> > dealing with. Otherwise we risk breaking the matrix bot that checks that
> > LLDB can debug C++ produced by older versions of LLVM (and by extension
> > libcxx).
> I've look at D12828 and D123580, and I don't see any way of versioning these
> changes ... may be @ldionne have an idea on how we could do this properly ?
>
> Also, in D124113, @labath mentions that this data formatter uses mostly
> indices to parse and access the various fields of the type data structure
> (because it uses some anonymous structs). This makes it very fragile on our
> end because our data formatter break every time they make a change in the
> layout ...
>
> @aprantl, I'll update the line your pointed at to the the field identifier
> instead of using changing the index while waiting for a better way to version
> this.
@aprantl, I'll update the line you pointed at to *use* the field identifier
instead of using changing the index, while waiting for a better way to version
this.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D128694/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D128694
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
