Michael137 added a comment. In D136935#3892082 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D136935#3892082>, @labath wrote:
> The return type handling for function pointers is not correct. If it's hard > to do, then maybe we could skip it (i suspect the original code didn't handle > that either), but I have a feeling it might not be that hard, given that > we're already able correctly extract the innermost argument types. Ah good catch, yes the original code just seems to skip the first typename (which need not be the actual return type if we're returning function pointers) since it only cares about the base name and arguments. Will see how easy this is to handle Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D136935/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D136935 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
