================
@@ -3073,14 +3073,43 @@
SymbolFileDWARF::FindDefinitionTypeForDWARFDeclContext(const DWARFDIE &die) {
// See comments below about -gsimple-template-names for why we attempt to
// compute missing template parameter names.
- ConstString template_params;
- if (type_system) {
- DWARFASTParser *dwarf_ast = type_system->GetDWARFParser();
- if (dwarf_ast)
- template_params = dwarf_ast->GetDIEClassTemplateParams(die);
+ std::vector<std::string> template_params;
+ DWARFDeclContext die_dwarf_decl_ctx;
+ DWARFASTParser *dwarf_ast = type_system ? type_system->GetDWARFParser() :
nullptr;
+ for (DWARFDIE ctx_die = die; ctx_die && !isUnitType(ctx_die.Tag());
+ ctx_die = ctx_die.GetParentDeclContextDIE()) {
+ die_dwarf_decl_ctx.AppendDeclContext(ctx_die.Tag(), ctx_die.GetName());
+ template_params.push_back(
+ (ctx_die.IsStructUnionOrClass() && dwarf_ast)
+ ? dwarf_ast->GetDIEClassTemplateParams(ctx_die)
+ : "");
}
+ const bool any_template_params = llvm::any_of(
+ template_params, [](llvm::StringRef p) { return !p.empty(); });
- const DWARFDeclContext die_dwarf_decl_ctx = die.GetDWARFDeclContext();
+ auto die_matches = [&](DWARFDIE type_die) {
+ // Resolve the type if both have the same tag or {class, struct} tags.
+ const bool tag_matches =
+ type_die.Tag() == tag ||
+ (IsStructOrClassTag(type_die.Tag()) && IsStructOrClassTag(tag));
----------------
labath wrote:
> I guess printing types in lldb would be technically wrong, since it'd print
> as "struct MyType {" instead of "class MyType {"?
Yes, that's why I said "it matters for ast construction". I think it would nice
to still print the type in the original way, which mostly comes up when someone
(technically incorrectly) forward-declares something as `struct Foo`, but
defines it as a class.
If we wanted to, we could make all members public regardless of the tag type. I
don't know why we don't do that. Is it just because it's nice to see the
original access specifiers in the type readouts ? (a rhetorical question) I
know that the access specifier can in theory affect the type layout, but I
don't think that's true for any real world ABI (and dwarf already encodes the
layout anyway).. Some users may declare types inside expressions and their
members would be private without the hack, but maybe they should just get what
they asked for...
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95905
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
