On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Eric Christopher <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > >> > Any ideas how we can make these types of debug info tests >> > more understandable to future devs? My only idea is copious comments, >> but I >> > feel like having some self-documenting system would be better and I just >> > don't have any good ideas about what it would look like. >> >> Yeah, I'm not sure what it would look like - essentially the test >> would have to reference constants from LLVM to describe the flags >> combined into the flags field. (&, better than that, the ability to >> specify just some part of the flags value that is of interest to a >> particular test) >> >> Probably just adding comments of the form: >> >> ; test that the flags represent the 'protected' access modifier >> ; 258 (flags) = 42 (thing1) | 157 (thing2) | (protected) 8 >> >> (I haven't actually looked up what constants are combined into the >> flags value in this case) > > > That would work, an option for more self-documentation would be to have the > debug output (e.g. [ DW_TAG_class_type ]) contain the access specifiers. > Just brain storming: what about having the IR asm printer show the sorted |'ed set of flags in a comment? > > -eric >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
