| Issue |
132182
|
| Summary |
[lldb] coerce the breakpoint condition _expression_ into a bool
|
| Labels |
new issue
|
| Assignees |
|
| Reporter |
k4lizen
|
Currently, when a user sets an _expression_ as a breakpoint condition, the _expression_ can evaluate to an arbitrary type and that then gets interpreted into a boolean with the IsLogicalTrue
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/lldb/source/Breakpoint/BreakpointLocation.cpp#L310
call. It would be smarter to wrap the condition into a `(bool)(..)` so that that conversion is handed off to the underlying compiler/type system.
Doing this would fix https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/132177 as the _expression_ parser would return a clean error. It would also help detect errors like https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/132179 .
Also, if we take the example from https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/132179 , if we set the breakpoint condition to just `bol`, lldb will always return true due to https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/132177 (or error out if that is fixed) whereas a user might expect that the `operator bool()` will be called.
Importantly, wrapping the condition text into just ``(bool)(..)`` doesn't work because the condition can contain multiple statements like `st1; st2; expr`, but it would work if wrapped into a statement _expression_ (https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Statement-Exprs.html) which is supported by clang. So wrapping it into a `"(bool)({ ... ;})"` should be fine (at least for C/C++).
![]()
_______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
