https://github.com/jh7370 commented:
I think these need to be split into individual PRs, as each will want reviewing
on its own merits, and potentially they might indicate missing test coverage,
warranting a test.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117151
___
https://github.com/jh7370 commented:
Looks reasonable to me, but I think it would be worth highlighting in the text
the difference between -e and -v, so that people doing code archaelogy don't
have to look up cat options.
Probably should get an lldb maintainer to approve though.
https://githu
jh7370 wrote:
> This looks like a nice improvement for folks using those generators. Even
> though most of these changes look straightforward, it would be a lot easier
> to review if this was broken up per subproject. Is there any reason that's
> not possible?
+1 to this: 195 files is too man
https://github.com/jh7370 commented:
As I think I mentioned in the original RFC, I'm not convinced the core
functionality for this belongs in LLDB. In my view, LLDB is a client that
should make use of a common telemetry library that can be used by other parts
of the wider LLVM toolchain, or in
@@ -0,0 +1,237 @@
+#ifndef LLDB_CORE_TELEMETRY_H
+#define LLDB_CORE_TELEMETRY_H
+
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+
+#include "lldb/Interpreter/CommandReturnObject.h"
+#include "lldb/Utility/StructuredData.h"
+#include "lldb/lldb-forward.h"
+#include "llvm/A
https://github.com/jh7370 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87815
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -0,0 +1,237 @@
+#ifndef LLDB_CORE_TELEMETRY_H
+#define LLDB_CORE_TELEMETRY_H
+
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+
+#include "lldb/Interpreter/CommandReturnObject.h"
+#include "lldb/Utility/StructuredData.h"
+#include "lldb/lldb-forward.h"
+#include "llvm/A
https://github.com/jh7370 requested changes to this pull request.
Hi, thanks for the contribution.
Please could you add a new lit test case to show that this behaviour works as
intended.
I note that this code as-is only impacts `--strip-all` behaviour. This means
that if you use `--strip-debu
jh7370 wrote:
I can merge it for you, but first I just want to confirm that all 4 commits in
this PR are intended to be for the PR? If not, you'll need to rebase and force
push.
There's no need for you to manually squash the fixups (although you might as
well if you do end up rebasing). When
jh7370 wrote:
@dankm, is there a particular reason you haven't merged this change in yet?
FWIW, the formatter check failed for some reason, but I'm not sure it's related
to any formatting issue. Please verify by running clang-format on your changes
before merging.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm
@@ -1696,6 +1696,40 @@ TEST(Support, ReplacePathPrefix) {
EXPECT_EQ(Path, "C:\\old/foo\\bar");
}
+TEST(Support, FindProgramName) {
+ StringRef WindowsProgName =
+ path::program_name("C:\\Test\\foo.exe", path::Style::windows);
+ EXPECT_EQ(WindowsProgName, "foo");
+
+
https://github.com/jh7370 approved this pull request.
Force pushing (and therefore rebasing) is [supposed to be
avoided](https://llvm.org/docs/GitHub.html#rebasing-pull-requests-and-force-pushes)
unless it's absolutely necessary. Was a rebase actually required for this
change? One of the motiv
@@ -5,11 +5,14 @@
# RUN: mkdir %t
# RUN: ln -s llvm-ranlib %t/llvm-ranlib-9
# RUN: ln -s llvm-ranlib %t/ranlib.exe
+# RUN: ln -s llvm-ranlib %t/x86_64-unknown-freebsd13.2-llvm-ranlib
jh7370 wrote:
Let's put the new test files and deletion of this old test in a
@@ -390,6 +390,21 @@ StringRef stem(StringRef path, Style style =
Style::native);
/// @result The extension of \a path.
StringRef extension(StringRef path, Style style = Style::native);
+/// Get the program's name
+///
+/// If the path ends with the string .exe, returns the s
@@ -5,16 +5,22 @@
# RUN: mkdir %t
# RUN: ln -s llvm-ar %t/llvm-ar-9
# RUN: ln -s llvm-ar %t/ar.exe
+# RUN: ln -s llvm-ar %t/x86_64-portbld-freebsd13.2-llvm-ar
+# RUN: ln -s llvm-ar %t/x86_64-portbld-freebsd13.2-llvm-ar.exe
# RUN: ln -s llvm-ar %t/arm-pokymllib32-linux-gnueabi-
@@ -1696,6 +1696,38 @@ TEST(Support, ReplacePathPrefix) {
EXPECT_EQ(Path, "C:\\old/foo\\bar");
}
+TEST(Support, FindProgramName) {
+ StringRef WindowsProgName =
+ path::program_name("C:\\Test\\foo.exe", path::Style::windows);
+ EXPECT_EQ(WindowsProgName, "foo");
+
+
@@ -600,6 +600,14 @@ StringRef extension(StringRef path, Style style) {
return fname.substr(pos);
}
+StringRef program_name(StringRef path, Style style) {
+ // In the future this may need to be extended to other
+ // program suffixes.
jh7370 wrote:
Unnece
Author: James Henderson
Date: 2021-05-18T10:43:33+01:00
New Revision: a1e6565855784988aa6302d6672705baf2a84ff2
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a1e6565855784988aa6302d6672705baf2a84ff2
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/a1e6565855784988aa6302d6672705baf2a84ff2.dif
Author: James Henderson
Date: 2020-01-29T10:23:41Z
New Revision: 7116e431c0ab4194907bbaf73482ac05d923787f
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7116e431c0ab4194907bbaf73482ac05d923787f
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/7116e431c0ab4194907bbaf73482ac05d923787f.diff
LO
19 matches
Mail list logo
