Since interaction with the python interpreter is moving towards
being more isolated, we won't be able to include this header from
normal files anymore, all includes of it should be localized to
the python library which will live under source/bindings/API/Python
after a future patch.
None of the files that were including this header actually depended
on it anyway, so it was just a dead include in every single instance.
llvm-svn: 238581
- use a hardcoded formatter to match all vector types, and make it so that their element type is taken into account when doing default formatting
- special case a vector of char to display byte values instead of characters by default
Fixes the test failures Ilia was seeing
llvm-svn: 231504
Unlike GDB, we tackle the problem of representing vector types in different styles by having a synthetic child provider that recognizes the format you're trying to apply to the variable, and coming up with the right type and number of child values to match that format
This makes for a more compact representation and less visual noise
Fixes rdar://5429347
llvm-svn: 231449
Function pointers had a summary generated for them bypassing formatters, directly as part of the ValueObject subsystem
This patch transitions that code into a hardcoded summary
llvm-svn: 223906
Type Validators have the purpose of looking at a ValueObject, and making sure that there is nothing semantically wrong about the object's contents
For instance, if you have a class that represents a speed, the validator might trigger if the speed value is greater than the speed of light
This first patch hooks up the moving parts in the formatters subsystem, but does not link ValueObjects to TypeValidators, nor lets the SB API be exposed to validators
It also lacks the notion of Python validators
llvm-svn: 217277
Replace adhoc inline implementation of llvm::array_lengthof in favour of the
implementation in LLVM. This is simply a cleanup change, no functional change
intended.
llvm-svn: 211868
Rationale:
Pretty simply, the idea is that sometimes type names are way too long and contain way too many details for the average developer to care about. For instance, a plain ol' vector of int might be shown as
std::__1::vector<int, std::__1::allocator<....
rather than the much simpler std::vector<int> form, which is what most developers would actually type in their code
Proposed solution:
Introduce a notion of "display name" and a corresponding API GetDisplayTypeName() to return such a crafted for visual representation type name
Obviously, the display name and the fully qualified (or "true") name are not necessarily the same - that's the whole point
LLDB could choose to pick the "display name" as its one true notion of a type name, and if somebody really needs the fully qualified version of it, let them deal with the problem
Or, LLDB could rename what it currently calls the "type name" to be the "display name", and add new APIs for the fully qualified name, making the display name the default choice
The choice that I am making here is that the type name will keep meaning the same, and people who want a type name suited for display will explicitly ask for one
It is the less risky/disruptive choice - and it should eventually make it fairly obvious when someone is asking for the wrong type
Caveats:
- for now, GetDisplayTypeName() == GetTypeName(), there is no logic to produce customized display type names yet.
- while the fully-qualified type name is still the main key to the kingdom of data formatters, if we start showing custom names to people, those should match formatters
llvm-svn: 209072
This decision has always been statically-bound to the individual formatter. With this patch, the idea is that this decision could potentially be dynamic depending on the ValueObject itself
llvm-svn: 207046
Zachary Turner
Enrico Granata
Tamas Berghammer
Saleem Abdulrasool