labath wrote: > If we are worried about supporting older uses of path expressions while we're > quite dramatically expanding what you can express in this syntax, we probably > should make the parser have a mode where it emulates the old path expression, > turning off the new operators.
FTR, I am *not* worried about supporting older uses. I was just anticipating that someone might be. As far as I am concerned we can pretty much any aspect of the path expression (but let's do that after flipping the flag). > `:` seems like a fine separator. C# seems to use `..` and swift uses `...` > and `..<` for the open and half-open ranges. But it seems like a single > character is simpler? Ah, I didn't realise this was so diverse. `:` would still be my first choice, but I'd be fine with the other options as well... https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141422 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
