On Oct 6, 2011, at 1:11 PM, Eric Christopher wrote: > > On Oct 6, 2011, at 1:03 PM, jahanian wrote: > >>> An earlier patch I had worked this up by looking up the implementation decl >>> and using that as part of the layout request, but John didn't think that >>> was correct but rather that we shouldn't be looking up the size in the >>> non-fragile ABI. >>> >> >> Offset that you see is the offset as seen by the compiler. It is not >> necessarily offset of the ivar in the object. Final offset is determined by >> the runtime. > > Right. > >> In any case: 1) there is no distinction between user-declared ivar and those >> synthesized when it comes to debug info. 2) Your logic should >> not depend on order of implementations and that both be available; as this >> is not the case in most situations. > > I think my current patch handles this really. Though I could update the > comment a bit more. Basically if the offset could change at runtime we just > emit a junk value (I could also emit nothing, but that's a lot more work) and > rely on the debugger to figure out where it is. Is there something else that > could be done?
If debugger is happy, I am OK with that too :). Just make sure that your patch is not dependent on the implementation order, etc. that we discussed. Additional comment would be good. Assuming, your code applies to all ivars and not those synthesized by the compiler because of property synthesis. - Fariborz > > > -eric
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
