I'll try the 2 additional string ref changes first and see how bad it is
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 3:36 PM Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote:
> OptionValueString is actually the next item on my list. I tried it before
> this and it was a very big CL, But maybe with this done it will be smaller.
> I can try again but if the cl grows too large i think it's better to do it
> in a followup. If nothing else so that if a buildbot fails it's easier to
> track it down with a more modest sized cl.
> For the printing stuff, it might be cleaner to just use an llvm stream and
> then pass it to Error::SetErrorString. The %*s macros will look kind of
> gross (for the same reason that the PRIx64 style macros look so horrible).
> But all these things combined will make a really big CL, I'd rather do it
> in chunks. Maybe format strings next then OptionValueString?
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 3:15 PM Greg Clayton <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> clayborg added a comment.
> I am not saying we have to do the printf changes, I was just seeing what
> you think. I would like to see the StringRef variants of functions put in
> as part of this.
lldb-commits mailing list