granata.enrico added inline comments.
================
Comment at: source/API/SBTypeSummary.cpp:155
@@ +154,3 @@
+ new CXXFunctionSummaryFormat(options,
+ [cb] (ValueObject& valobj, Stream& stm, const
TypeSummaryOptions& opt) -> bool {
+ SBStream stream;
----------------
evgeny777 wrote:
> granata.enrico wrote:
> > Should we check for cb != null here?
> May be assert(cb) ?
No, I would rather much us create an hollow SBTypeSummary (with a
TypeSummaryImplSP that points to nullptr). Then you would get an invalid one
(IsValid() == false) but not cause a crash
================
Comment at: source/API/SBTypeSummary.cpp:157
@@ +156,3 @@
+ SBStream stream;
+ if (!cb(valobj.GetSP(), &opt, stream))
+ return false;
----------------
evgeny777 wrote:
> granata.enrico wrote:
> > I assume you are essentially relying on the SBValue constructor that takes
> > a ValueObjectSP here, right?
> > And similarly for the SummaryOptions?
> You're right - implicit construction here
Sorry to nitpick, but is there any advantage to not using explicit construction
here?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13657
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
