================ ---------------- ldionne wrote:
Actually, enabling the size-based vector doesn't technically require these changes to `__split_buffer` AFAICT, since we only ever use `__split_buffer` as an implementation detail, and the representation of `__split_buffer` has no impact on the representation of `std::vector` itself. IMO this leaves a few options: 1. We don't bother changing the representation of `__split_buffer`, since that's only relevant to optimizing `std::deque` and I'm not certain that's a goal you're trying to achieve. 2. We do change the representation of `__split_buffer`, but then that should be keyed on `_LIBCPP_ABI_SIZE_BASED_DEQUE` since, like I said above, the representation of `__split_buffer` only impacts the representation of `std::deque`. 3. We refactor `__split_buffer` to accept the layout argument like I suggested in my original comment and we use the desired layout from both `deque` and `vector`. That makes everything very explicit, but it's not clear to me that this is needed if our end goal is truly just to optimize the representation of `std::vector`. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this, especially about the need to change `__split_buffer` at all in order to change the representation of `std::vector`. I don't know why it didn't occur to me earlier. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139632 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
