gulfemsavrun wrote:
> @gulfemsavrun apologies, fix is here: #94046
Thanks, this fixed the issue.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93881
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/
royitaqi wrote:
This appears to be failing the `lldb-x86-64-debian` buildbot:
https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/68/builds/75333
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92843
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lis
Michael137 wrote:
> The correct answer here is probably to fix the sizes in the RecordLayout
> itself; in particular, the DataSize of the members.
That would be ideal, but also means we'd have to reflect the various C++
attributes that affect layout in DWARF. Avoiding adding such language-spec
https://github.com/royitaqi created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94067
Problematic PR: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92843
There is a failure in the added test for Linux (test passes on macOS)
The problem of the said test is that its assertion is unnecessarily detailed
royitaqi wrote:
I have proposed a fix in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94067
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92843
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-comm
https://github.com/royitaqi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94067
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
royitaqi wrote:
cc @clayborg
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94067
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
efriedma-quic wrote:
> > The correct answer here is probably to fix the sizes in the RecordLayout
> > itself; in particular, the DataSize of the members.
>
> That would be ideal, but also means we'd have to reflect the various C++
> attributes that affect layout in DWARF. Avoiding adding such
gulfemsavrun wrote:
We also see the same test error on our bots.
https://luci-milo.appspot.com/ui/p/fuchsia/builders/toolchain.ci/clang-linux-x64-rbe/b8746387351248919521/overview
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92843
___
lldb-commits mailing
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
@@ -177,7 +177,8 @@ def test_get_transcript(self):
# (lldb) r
self.assertEqual(transcript[3]["command"], "r")
self.assertEqual(transcript[3]["commandName"], "process launch")
-self.assertEqual(transcript[3]["commandArguments"], "-X true --")
+
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
https://github.com/jimingham updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94007
>From e024ea45c052411f2e7284c0ef5a6d048681cad7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jim Ingham
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 11:29:27 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Add doc strings for SBValue::IsValid and
SBValue::GetError.
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
@@ -177,7 +177,8 @@ def test_get_transcript(self):
# (lldb) r
self.assertEqual(transcript[3]["command"], "r")
self.assertEqual(transcript[3]["commandName"], "process launch")
-self.assertEqual(transcript[3]["commandArguments"], "-X true --")
+
https://github.com/royitaqi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94067
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -45,6 +45,38 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very limited API, lldb will only
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
https://github.com/jimingham edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94007
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
https://github.com/royitaqi updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94067
>From 8499f16ad46b3268f35da2bfcbfa02a10aab935a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Roy Shi
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 22:30:40 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 01/13] Add resolvedCommand to transcript, add transcript to
statistics
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
royitaqi wrote:
FWIW, it's easier to [see the fix this
way](https://github.com/royitaqi/llvm-project/compare/enhance-transcript-2...royitaqi:llvm-project:enhance-transcript-3).
<-- This is the delta of `royitaqi:enhance-transcript-3` on top of
`royitaqi:enhance-transcript-2` (which has been
https://github.com/royitaqi edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94067
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only re
gulfemsavrun wrote:
Can you please revert the patch if it's going to take a while to land the fix
because I don't want our builders to stay red over the weekend?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/92843
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commit
https://github.com/gulfemsavrun created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94088
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#92843 because it broke some lldb tests:
https://luci-milo.appspot.com/ui/p/fuchsia/builders/toolchain.ci/clang-linux-x64/b8746385730949743489/overview
>From e6c1256867d6992d5affca53
https://github.com/gulfemsavrun closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94088
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
Author: gulfemsavrun
Date: 2024-05-31T20:06:18-07:00
New Revision: 85fd1688b2fc73ba97d95e621cfbfe9a3fff
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/85fd1688b2fc73ba97d95e621cfbfe9a3fff
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/85fd1688b2fc73ba97d95e621cfbfe9a3fff.diff
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-lldb
Author: None (gulfemsavrun)
Changes
Reverts llvm/llvm-project#92843 because it broke some lldb tests:
https://luci-milo.appspot.com/ui/p/fuchsia/builders/toolchain.ci/clang-linux-x64/b8746385730949743489/overview
---
Full diff: https://github.com/l
royitaqi wrote:
@gulfemsavrun
The fix PR is ready, as linked in the above
(https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94067). I just need someone to
approve it and merge it.
I'm quite new to this process. Is reverting also require someone to approve a
revert PR and merge it? Or is it easier,
royitaqi wrote:
Just curious, @gulfemsavrun , how were you able to merge without another
person's approval of the PR? I'm noob to github pull request - thought revert
PR are the same as other PRs and need an approval, but reading this PR it seems
such step isn't required.
https://github.com/l
vvereschaka wrote:
Hi @Endilll ,
these changes break MSVC build of the projects including LLDB. The `cl`
compiler gets unsupported gcc/clang options, such as
`-Wno-deprecated-declarations`, `-Wno-unknown-pragmas` and
`-Wno-strict-aliasing`, and gets failed because of it.
Here is the command
101 - 137 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
