martong added a comment. > @martong It's not related to lookup or anything like that, it's just that we > don't have enough information in our debug info AST to allow people to use > meta programming. The custom logic we have in LLDB looks into the std C++ > module to fill out these gaps in the AST by hand when they are used in an > expression. > > The remark about the alternative being slow just means that fixing all the > templates we have in our debug info AST seems like a costly approach. I'm > also not sure how well it would work, as I never tried mixing a C++ module in > an ASTContext that isn't currently being parsed by Clang.
Well, I still don't understand how LLDB synthesis the AST. So you have a C++ module in a .pcm file. This means you could create an AST from that with ASTReader from it's .clang_ast section, right? In that case the AST should be complete with all type information. If this was the case then I don't see why it is not possible to use clang::ASTImporter to import templates and specializations, since we do exactly that in CTU. Or do you guys create the AST from the debug info, from the .debug_info section of .pcm module file? And this is why AST is incomplete? I've got this from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgkZ8PTNSHQ&list=PL85Cf-ok7HpppFWlp2wX_-A1dkyFVlaEB&index=2&t=5s If this is the case, then comes my naiive quiestion: Why don't you use the ASTReader? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59485/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59485 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
