Nerixyz wrote:
> The composite formats are not an _un_reasonable idea, but I can't help but
> wonder if we even need to touch the generic data formatter infrastructure. I
> mean we already have the ability to do callback-based summaries, so what if
> we just did the stl switch inside the callback? Being able to do this
> declaratively is sort of nice, but this already isn't completely declarative
> since you have callbacks for type validation.
That's a good point. I removed the `CXXCompositeSummaryFormat` and implemented
the selection in a lambda.
> Implementing `${var._M_dataplus._M_p}` in c++ is not that hard, and this is
> probably one of our more complex summaries (containers just say
> `size=#children`), which doesn't even need to be customized for different
> STLs.
Right, I did that at the beginning, but then saw more types using string
summaries without looking at what they're doing, so I wanted to support both.
Without the new summary type this PR is much more manageable.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/143177
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
