[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D74136: [LLDB] WIP: Follow DW_AT_decl_file when setting breakpoint

[Konrad Wilhelm Kleine via Phabricator via lldb-commits]

kwk marked an inline comment as done.
kwk added a comment.

@labath  please see my inline comment.



================
Comment at: lldb/source/Breakpoint/BreakpointResolverName.cpp:315
+      if (filter_by_cu && filter_by_function) {
+        // Keep this symbol context if it is a function call to a function
+        // whose declaration is located in a file that passes. This is needed
----------------
labath wrote:
> This mention of a "function call" is confusing. Either a function is in a file or it isn't. Why do we care about who calls who?
@labath we have this `filter_by_function` as an indirection to let `BreakpointResolverName::SearchCallback` know that the `SearchFilter` needs a special handling. But while reviewing the code now I noticed that only the implementations of `SearchFilter::GetFilterRequiredItems` currently either return

  - `eSymbolContextModule` (for `SearchFilterByModule` and `SearchFilterByModuleList`) or  
  - `eSymbolContextModule | eSymbolContextCompUnit | eSymbolContextFunction` (for `SearchFilterByModuleListAndCU`). 

I thought this was clever at a time when the old `SearchFilterByModuleListAndCU` which then only returned `eSymbolContextModule | eSymbolContextCompUnit `. With my new search filter I wanted a special handling which is why I wrote a new search filter class and had it return `eSymbolContextModule | eSymbolContextCompUnit | eSymbolContextFunction`. But when you confirmed my question to change the default behavior (https://reviews.llvm.org/D74136#1869622), the new class became the default implementation and there no longer is a need to distinguish the required items for this search filter.

Makes sense?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D74136/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D74136