================
@@ -18,6 +18,26 @@ def tearDown(self):
if self.background_pid:
os.kill(self.background_pid, signal.SIGKILL)
+ def test_getname(self):
+ """Test the SBModule::GetName() method"""
+ self.build()
+ target, _, _, _ = lldbutil.run_to_source_breakpoint(
+ self, "// break here", lldb.SBFileSpec("main.c")
+ )
+
+ self.assertGreater(target.GetNumModules(), 0)
+ for i in range(target.GetNumModules()):
+ module = target.GetModuleAtIndex(i)
+ file_spec = module.GetFileSpec()
+ name = module.GetName()
+ if file_spec.IsValid() and file_spec.exists:
+#If file is valid and file exist, expect GetName() to be None
+ self.assertIsNone(name, f"Expected None for module with valid
file {file_spec.GetFilename()}, got {name!r}")
+ else:
+#If no valid file, expect GetName() to be a non - empty string
+ self.assertIsInstance(name, str)
+ self.assertTrue(name, "Expected a non-empty name for module
without a valid file")
----------------
Jlalond wrote:
Thanks for the great context on this Pavel
> What do you intend to use this for? Just show it to the user, or use in some
> sort of a critical capacity?
I'm currently trying to generate some metrics around Modules, and there are
some cases where I don't have access to the UUID. I think the identifier would
be great, but a generic name field would also be nice for logging.
Should we pivot this change to expose the `m_file` name if `m_object_name` is
not present? If I follow correct the precedence of 'uniqueness' is
- UUID
- The numerical ID you linked
- Object name
- File name
Having a 'helper' accessor exposing the object name or the file name would
solve my needs.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/150331
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
