dexonsmith accepted this revision.
dexonsmith added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D35159#823211, @erik.pilkington wrote:
> Use LLVM naming conventions for all the new stuff in this patch.
Thanks for renaming everything. LGTM!
https://
dexonsmith added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D35159#809724, @erik.pilkington wrote:
> Rebase. I don't think the issue of purging underscores from this file/libcxx
> should block this, if we want to discuss that cfe-dev would probably be the
> place. I agree that it would be nice to c
EricWF added a comment.
+1 for moving this file to LLVM's internal style.
Comment at: src/cxa_demangle.cpp:44
+class string_ref
+{
dexonsmith wrote:
> mehdi_amini wrote:
> > dexonsmith wrote:
> > > erik.pilkington wrote:
> > > > mehdi_amini wrote:
> > > > > I
erik.pilkington added a comment.
> Looks like this demangler's design is similar to my demangler for Microsoft
> name mangling scheme (https://reviews.llvm.org/D34667). Is that a
> coincidence? Both demanglers create AST, stringize it using
> print_left/print_right (I named them write_pre/write
dexonsmith added a reviewer: mclow.lists.
dexonsmith added a subscriber: mclow.lists.
dexonsmith added a comment.
+mclow.lists
Comment at: src/cxa_demangle.cpp:44
+class string_ref
+{
mehdi_amini wrote:
> dexonsmith wrote:
> > erik.pilkington wrote:
> > > meh
mehdi_amini added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D35159#807075, @dexonsmith wrote:
> This LGTM. Mehdi, do you have any other concerns?
No other concern (haven't looked further for any either)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35159
___
cfe-commi
ruiu added a comment.
Looks like this demangler's design is similar to my demangler for Microsoft
name mangling scheme (https://reviews.llvm.org/D34667). Is that a coincidence?
Both demanglers create AST, stringize it using print_left/print_right (I named
them write_pre/write_post), and use cus
mehdi_amini added inline comments.
Comment at: src/cxa_demangle.cpp:44
+class string_ref
+{
dexonsmith wrote:
> erik.pilkington wrote:
> > mehdi_amini wrote:
> > > If this is supposed to be *the* ultimate LLVM demangler, can we follow
> > > LLVM coding standar
dexonsmith added a comment.
This LGTM. Mehdi, do you have any other concerns?
Comment at: src/cxa_demangle.cpp:44
+class string_ref
+{
erik.pilkington wrote:
> mehdi_amini wrote:
> > If this is supposed to be *the* ultimate LLVM demangler, can we follow LLVM
mehdi_amini added inline comments.
Comment at: src/cxa_demangle.cpp:87
+
+class stream
+{
Doc
(same for non trivial APIs)
Comment at: src/cxa_demangle.cpp:125
+
+typedef unsigned stream_position;
+
Doc
Co
erik.pilkington marked 4 inline comments as done.
erik.pilkington added inline comments.
Comment at: src/cxa_demangle.cpp:44
+class string_ref
+{
mehdi_amini wrote:
> If this is supposed to be *the* ultimate LLVM demangler, can we follow LLVM
> coding standard
mehdi_amini added inline comments.
Comment at: src/cxa_demangle.cpp:44
+class string_ref
+{
If this is supposed to be *the* ultimate LLVM demangler, can we follow LLVM
coding standard?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35159
__
EricWF added a comment.
This patch causes `test_demangle.pass.cpp` to fail with UBSan.
Standard Error:
--
/home/eric/workspace/libcxxabi/src/cxa_demangle.cpp:113:44: runtime error:
null pointer passed as argument 2, which is declared to never be null
/usr/include/string.h:47:14: note: no
13 matches
Mail list logo