to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Summary:
This issue came up because it caused problems in our unit tests. The StringPool did connect counterparts only once and silently ignored the values passed in subsequent calls.
The simplest solution for the unit tests would be silent overwrite. In practice, however, it seems useful to assert that we never overwrite a different mangled counterpart.
If we ever have mangled counterparts for other languages than C++, this makes it more likely to notice collisions.
I added an assertion that allows the following cases:
* inserting a new value
* overwriting the empty string
* overwriting with an identical value
I fixed the unit tests, which used "random" strings and thus produced collisions.
It would be even better if there was a way to reset or isolate the StringPool, but that's a different story.
Reviewers: jingham, friss, labath
Subscribers: lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50536
llvm-svn: 339669
Summary: It was not immediately clear to me whether or not non-null-terminated StringRef's are supported in ConstString and/or the counterpart mechanism. From this test it seems to be fine. Maybe useful to keep?
Reviewers: labath
Subscribers: lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50334
llvm-svn: 339292
Summary: `IsEmpty()` and `operator bool() == false` have equal semantics. Usage in Mangled::GetDemangledName() was incorrect. What it actually wants is a check for null-string. Split this off of D50071 and added a test to clarify usage.
Reviewers: labath, jingham
Subscribers: erik.pilkington, lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50327
llvm-svn: 339014
Summary:
Per discussion in D28616, having two ways two request logging (log
enable lldb XXX verbose && log enable -v lldb XXX) is confusing. This
removes the first option and standardizes all code to use the second
one.
I've added a LLDB_LOGV macro as a shorthand for if(log &&
log->GetVerbose()) and switched most of the affected log statements to
use that (I've only left a couple of cases that were doing complex
computations in an if(log) block).
Reviewers: jingham, zturner
Subscribers: lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29510
llvm-svn: 294113
Chandler Carruth