Yes, it's a good idea to add cfe-dev.
It is totally possible that I overlooked something and clang can help with
this kind of superficial parsing.
As far as I can see even clang-format does it's own parsing
(UnwrappedLineParser.cpp) and clang-format has very similar need of roughly
understanding o
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32297
Jim Ingham changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.0 |unspecified
Component|All Bugs
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32297
tbl...@icloud.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Product|compiler-rt |lldb
Assignee|unassignedb...@nondo
On 01.03.2017 10:13, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The contract for the LLDB port on NetBSD has been prolonged by The
> NetBSD Foundation. The additional time will cover the features that were
> delayed in order to address blockers that were unveiled during the work
> that has been done.
>
If there is any way to re-use clang parser for this, it would be
wonderful. Even if it means adding support to clang for whatever you need
in order to make it possible. You mention performance, are you certain
that clang's parser would be unacceptably slow?
+cfe-dev as they may have some more in
Hi, Everyone.
Current implementation of CPlusPlusLanguage::MethodName::Parse() doesn't
cover full extent of possible function declarations,
or even declarations returned by abi::__cxa_demangle.
Consider this code:
--
#include
#include
#include
