[libcxx-commits] [libcxx] [lldb] [lldb][libc++] Hide all libc++ implementation details from stacktraces (PR #108870)

[A. Jiang via libcxx-commits]

================
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+import lldb
+from lldbsuite.test.decorators import *
+from lldbsuite.test.lldbtest import *
+from lldbsuite.test import lldbutil
+
+
+class LibCxxInternalsRecognizerTestCase(TestBase):
+    NO_DEBUG_INFO_TESTCASE = True
+
+    @add_test_categories(["libc++"])
+    def test_frame_recognizer(self):
+        """Test that implementation details of libc++ are hidden"""
+        self.build()
+        (target, process, thread, bkpt) = lldbutil.run_to_source_breakpoint(
+            self, "break here", lldb.SBFileSpec("main.cpp")
+        )
+
+        expected_parents = {
+            "sort_less(int, int)": ["::sort", "test_algorithms"],
+            # `std::ranges::sort` is implemented as an object of types `__sort`.
----------------
frederick-vs-ja wrote:

There're a large number of such customization point objects (and niebloids, which will be respecified as CPOs soon, see [P3136R0](https://wg21.link/p3136r0)) since C++20. Should we invent some convention to recognize them uniformly?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/108870