[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

aprantl added a comment. Whoops. Thanks for fixing it! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71310/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71310 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

vsk added a comment. I believe this change is responsible: - m_validator_cont("validator", "regex-validator", clist), m_enabled(false), @aprantl was the `m_enabled` initialization supposed to be deleted? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://review

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

vsk added a comment. Just a heads up while I investigate, I'm starting to see this on the sanitizer bot: /Users/buildslave/jenkins/workspace/lldb-cmake-sanitized/llvm-project/lldb/include/lldb/DataFormatters/TypeCategory.h:278:35: runtime error: load of value 190, which is not a valid value

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

aprantl added a comment. In D71310#1780219 , @jingham wrote: > Would you mind adding a mention on the Projects page? This was a neat idea > and realistically if it just sits in git, in a few months no one will > remember it's there. Done. Repository

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

jingham added a comment. Would you mind adding a mention on the Projects page? This was a neat idea and realistically if it just sits in git, in a few months no one will remember it's there. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71310/new

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGee64dfd953f8: Remove TypeValidators (NFC in terms of the testsuite) (authored by aprantl). Herald added a project: LLDB. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71310?vs=233209&id=233394#toc

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

aprantl accepted this revision. aprantl added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. That sounds like there is consensus. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71310/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71310 ___ lldb

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

teemperor added a comment. +1 CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71310/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71310 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

davide added a comment. In D71310#1778534 , @jingham wrote: > Adrian and I talked about this some more. Apparently the idea was that you > have some type Foo and you want to look for some error state in instances of > that type (Foo::a + Foo::b < 10).

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

jingham added a comment. Adrian and I talked about this some more. Apparently the idea was that you have some type Foo and you want to look for some error state in instances of that type (Foo::a + Foo::b < 10). So you add a Type Validator for Foo that does this check, and every time lldb prin

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D71310: RFC: Remove "Validators"

aprantl created this revision. aprantl added reviewers: jingham, jasonmolenda. Herald added a subscriber: mgorny. Data formatter Validators are completely wired up all the way to the SBAPI, but as far as I can tell they are not used anywhere (including swift-lldb) and also are not tested. I'm pu