[lldb-dev] FileSpec and normalization questions

Zachary Turner via lldb-dev lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Apr 19 11:37:13 PDT 2018

We actually use it in some places, but it's limited.  Before I did that was
when I added the PathSyntax to FileSpec which essentially servers the same
purpose.  We could in theory drop PathSyntax now that LLVM supports all of
the same functionality.  It's a pretty invasive refactor though which I
never had time to do.

I think I might have tried to replace some of the low level functions in
FileSpec with the LLVM equivalents and gotten a few test failures, but I
didn't have time to investigate.  It would be a worthwhile experiment for
someone to try again if they have some cycles.

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:28 AM Jim Ingham <jingham at apple.com> wrote:

> > On Apr 19, 2018, at 11:21 AM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:19 AM Jim Ingham via lldb-dev <
> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > The last time I looked at the llvm functions they only support the path
> syntax of the llvm host, which won't do for lldb.  But maybe they have
> gotten more general recently?
> >
> >
> > Yes in fact I was the one who updated them to make them more general.
> You can now specify an enumeration parameter which will cause the algorithm
> to treat paths as either windows, posix, or whatever the host is.
> If I were guessing, I would have guessed that!
> Since you probably know how the llvm functions work better than most, were
> there technical reasons why, having done the work on the llvm side, you
> didn't adopt them in lldb?  Or was it just a matter of time?
> Jim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20180419/64d35d9a/attachment.html>

More information about the lldb-dev mailing list