r198699 - Debug info: Implement a cleaner version of r198461. For symmetry with

[Eric Christopher]

Cool deal. Thanks!

-eric

On Tue Jan 07 2014 at 2:13:11 PM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com> wrote:

> Hi Eric,
>
> you convinced me: r198715 should be much, much easier to review!
>
> -- adrian
>
> On Jan 7, 2014, at 13:57, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Can you add the diff between the two revisions at least to the thread
> here so I can take an easier look? :)
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > -eric
> >
> > On Tue Jan 07 2014 at 1:55:49 PM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 7, 2014, at 13:50, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Tue Jan 07 2014 at 11:31:12 AM, Adrian Prantl <aprantl at apple.com>
> wrote:
> > > Author: adrian
> > > Date: Tue Jan  7 13:24:24 2014
> > > New Revision: 198699
> > >
> > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=198699&view=rev
> > > Log:
> > > Debug info: Implement a cleaner version of r198461. For symmetry with
> > > C and C++ don't emit an extra lexical scope for the compound statement
> > > that is the body of an Objective-C method.
> > >
> > > rdar://problem/15010825
> > >
> > >
> > > Next time it would be good if you could revert the previous patch so
> that we only have to examine your current changes.
> >
> > Sure, I can do that next time! Sorry for the extra confusion.
> > >
> > > I seem to recall your previous patch changed some C++ testcases and
> that your new patch hasn't changed them back. What's going on there? It may
> make sense to revert this and your previous patch and reapply with just the
> fixes needed for your objective c problem?
> >
> > The previous patch added a couple of scoping-related tests to the C++
> test cases that were not there originally, and they are still valid.
> >
> > Modified: cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/linetable-cleanup.cpp
> > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/
> CodeGenCXX/linetable-cleanup.cpp?rev=198461&r1=198460&r2=198461&view=diff
> > ============================================================
> ==================
> > --- cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/linetable-cleanup.cpp (original)
> > +++ cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/linetable-cleanup.cpp Fri Jan  3 17:34:30
> 2014
> > @@ -46,12 +46,14 @@ void bar()
> > void baz()
> > {
> >   if (!foo())
> > -    // CHECK: {{.*}} = metadata !{i32 [[@LINE+1]], i32 0, metadata
> !{{.*}}, null}
> > +    // CHECK: ![[SCOPE1:.*]] = metadata !{{{.*}}, i32 [[@LINE-1]],
> {{.*}}} ; [ DW_TAG_lexical_block ]
> > +    // CHECK: {{.*}} = metadata !{i32 [[@LINE+1]], i32 0, metadata
> ![[SCOPE1]], null}
> >     return;
> >
> >   if (foo()) {
> >     // no cleanup
> > -    // CHECK: {{.*}} = metadata !{i32 [[@LINE+1]], i32 0, metadata
> !{{.*}}, null}
> > +    // CHECK: {{.*}} = metadata !{i32 [[@LINE+2]], i32 0, metadata
> ![[SCOPE2:.*]], null}
> > +    // CHECK: ![[SCOPE2]] = metadata !{{{.*}}, i32 [[@LINE-3]], {{.*}}}
> ; [ DW_TAG_lexical_block ]
> >     return;
> >   }
> >   // CHECK: ![[RETBAZ]] = metadata !{i32 [[@LINE+1]], i32 0, metadata
> !{{.*}}, null}
> >
> > It tests that the two return stmts are indeed in two different lexical
> scopes.
> >
> > -- adrian
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140107/670461e8/attachment.html>