[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D90840: [lldb/DWARF] Fix sizes of DW_OP_const[1248][us] and DW_OP_litN results

[Jonas Devlieghere via Phabricator via lldb-commits]

JDevlieghere accepted this revision.
JDevlieghere added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

LGTM. It fixes the issue at hand and gets us closer to conforming to the standard.



================
Comment at: lldb/source/Expression/DWARFExpression.cpp:948
+  // there.
+  auto to_generic = [&](auto v) {
+    bool is_signed = std::is_signed<decltype(v)>::value;
----------------
Can't wait for C++20's templated lambdas ;-) 


================
Comment at: lldb/source/Expression/DWARFExpression.cpp:1270
     case DW_OP_const1u:
-      stack.push_back(Scalar((uint8_t)opcodes.GetU8(&offset)));
+      stack.emplace_back(to_generic(opcodes.GetU8(&offset)));
       break;
----------------
labath wrote:
> dblaikie wrote:
> > Why the change to emplace_back? Generally I'd advocate for push_back where possible, since it can't invoke explicit conversions which can require more scrutiny (eg: a vector of unique_ptrs can have a unique_ptr rvalue push_back'd, but can't have a raw pointer push_back'd (a raw pointer would have to be emplace_back'd) - so when I see push_back I can assume it's a "safe" operation)
> I don't know. I wanted to be fancy? Normally, I am also against the overuse of emplace_back...
TIL


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D90840/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D90840