[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

JDevlieghere abandoned this revision. JDevlieghere added a comment. Thanks Pavel. I should've dug a little deeper in the rich mangling context. After giving it a second look I think you're absolutely right and we can drop this patch in favor of D118814 . CHANG

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

labath added a comment. In D118812#3292884 , @labath wrote: > And extracting the name this way will also save us from having to another > parse of the demangled name (to extract the base name), so it's double > goodness. I don't think the actual extract

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

labath added a comment. In D118812#3291109 , @dblaikie wrote: > (ie: what's the longest name that could be produced by a 10k long mangled > name? and see if that's worth having another cutoff for) I can create a 1MB demangled

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

labath added a comment. In D118812#3291954 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > In D118812#3291482 , @dblaikie > wrote: > >> In D118812#3291303 , @jingham >> wrote: >> >>> In D1188

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

jingham added a comment. If we can distinguish between "when we handle all mangled names" and "when we handle one" I think we should continue to demangle names in the "when we handle one" case, since you never know when somebody really might need to look at the whole name. But OTOH that's prob

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

JDevlieghere added a comment. In D118812#3291969 , @clayborg wrote: > Yikes sorry, I read line Symtab.cpp:311 as if it was demangling the name > first and then checking _its_ length... > > The settings leads one to believe that we don't ever demangle nam

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

clayborg added a comment. In D118812#3291950 , @JDevlieghere wrote: > In D118812#3291937 , @clayborg > wrote: > >> Can we put a limit on the length of the kinds of names we are willing to >> demangle in the fir

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

JDevlieghere added a comment. In D118812#3291482 , @dblaikie wrote: > In D118812#3291303 , @jingham wrote: > >> In D118812#3291109 , @dblaikie >> wrote: >> >>> Any chance

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

JDevlieghere added a comment. In D118812#3291937 , @clayborg wrote: > Can we put a limit on the length of the kinds of names we are willing to > demangle in the first place? How long are some of these names _prior_ to > demangling? It would be great if

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

clayborg added a comment. Can we put a limit on the length of the kinds of names we are willing to demangle in the first place? How long are some of these names _prior_ to demangling? It would be great if we could skip demangling names that are too long to begin with. That would allow us to ski

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

dblaikie added a subscriber: rsmith. dblaikie added a comment. In D118812#3291303 , @jingham wrote: > In D118812#3291109 , @dblaikie > wrote: > >> Any chance you might want a limit on the size of the demangled na

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

jingham added a comment. In D118812#3291109 , @dblaikie wrote: > Any chance you might want a limit on the size of the demangled name too? > (might be worth considering what the most densely encoded mangled name is > (ie: what's the longest name that cou

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

kastiglione added a comment. Is it worth trying to come up with a limit that's not arbitrarily picked? Comment at: lldb/source/Symbol/Symtab.cpp:300 +const uint64_t mangling_limit = +ModuleList::GetGlobalModuleListProperties().GetDemanglingLimit(); ---

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

dblaikie added a comment. Any chance you might want a limit on the size of the demangled name too? (might be worth considering what the most densely encoded mangled name is (ie: what's the longest name that could be produced by a 10k long mangled name? and see if that's worth having another cut

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D118812: [lldb] Add a setting to skip long mangled names

JDevlieghere created this revision. JDevlieghere added reviewers: jingham, clayborg, labath. JDevlieghere requested review of this revision. Libraries which rely heavily on templates (e.g. boost) can generate extremely long symbol names, with mangled names in the 10 000 of characters. These symb