cmtice wrote: > I agree with Pavel that using `-` for ranges of bitfields was an unfortunate > choice, which really only worked because we didn't intend to provide the > addition operators in the ValueObject path specifications. Now that we're > going to add those, we ought to switch to something that isn't ambiguous. And > operations on one of the ends of a range request seem like something you > really might want to do. > > If we are worried about supporting older uses of path expressions while we're > quite dramatically expanding what you can express in this syntax, we probably > should make the parser have a mode where it emulates the old path expression, > turning off the new operators. > > `:` seems like a fine separator. C# seems to use `..` and swift uses `...` > and `..<` for the open and half-open ranges. But it seems like a single > character is simpler?
My 2 cents: I prefer using ':' https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141422 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
