[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] RFC: Proposed change in the disassembly default format in lldb

[Zachary Turner]

What if this were done only for functions whose names were a certain length or longer?  When the function is a reasonable length, it's nice to see it embedded directly at the call site.  But maybe for functions whose name is too long, we could print some kind of magic string.  I find it a little jarring to just see <+31> for example.  In my head I know it's <+31> from this function, but it's still a little awkward.  What about a magic identifier instead?   Something like (this func) + 31.  I'll use my "symbol name instead of address format" since I'm trying to sell that idea at the same time to give a few examples.

0x107915454 <+68>:   jne    CommandObjectBreakpointList::DoExecute + 113           ; [CommandObjectBreakpoint.cpp:1420]
0x107915454 <+68>:   jne    (this func) + 113                                                            ; [CommandObjectBreakpoint.cpp:1420]
0x107915454 <+68>:   jne    MyClass<int>::DoSomething() + 113                              ; [CommandObjectBreakpoint.cpp:1420]

In the second line, (this func) is used because the name to display is determined "too complicated" by some heuristic.  I'm not sure if we care that it be deterministic or not.  More often than not we prefer to see the function name inlined.  So a heuristic could take into account length plus number of angle brackets, for example.


REPOSITORY
  rL LLVM

http://reviews.llvm.org/D7578

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/