VladimirMakaev marked an inline comment as done. VladimirMakaev added a comment.
In D149213#4520309 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D149213#4520309>, @tom.tromey wrote: >> Apart from just implementing type system itself (which is much bigger scope >> than this change) there are other non-trivial issues: >> >> 1. There is no "compiler-as-a-service" in Rust so getting expressions to >> work is non-trivial. An interpreter of some sort needs to be built with >> subset of Rust support > > My work also included a parser for some Rust expressions. Yeah I reviewed your fork and I saw there was a parser. So it could potentially be used with some success. With this approach we can use Clang for expression evaluations which might be inconvenient for Rust developers but it's decent enough. Other concerns with having this tested with CI still stands. Overall I agree that having TypeSystemRust will offer a better experience and more tuning but this fix is quite cheap and should be a big improvement over current state of things. Do you know by chance if there are other areas apart from enums which are currently broken in LLDB and cannot be fixed via synthetic provider? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D149213/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D149213 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
