Michael137 added a comment. In D134493#3814761 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D134493#3814761>, @werat wrote:
> In D134493#3811253 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D134493#3811253>, @labath wrote: > >> lol, I knew about the last two parts (not that I agree with them, but I >> think we have about an equal amount of code which relies on it, and that >> which tries to work around it), but the first one is really weird. I think >> we have invented a middle ground between sign- and zero-extension. > > haha, so this mean no chance of fixing this? I have a workaround for this as > well -- > https://github.com/google/lldb-eval/blob/04a73616c012c3dac7fb11206511bd2a9fe16db4/lldb-eval/value.cc#L146 > I can live with that, but current behaviour does look like a bug. That does look like a bug, thanks for reporting. Was going to open an issue and take a look at it this week Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D134493/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D134493 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
