labath added a comment.
This is fine, though, since you're already touching these lines, I'd consider
converting them from LLDB_LOGF to LLDB_LOG at the same time (getting rid of
most of the static_casts...).
However, I don't think we should be changing `(void)` to `static_cast<void>`.
There is also ample precedent in llvm for using -1 (or sometimes `~0`) to mean
UINTxx_MAX, so I'm not sure we should change that too. Though it is somewhat
confusing, in a way, it is actually safer, as `-1` will always convert to the
right `MAX` value. (e.g., in `foo = -1`, the value will remain fff...ff even if
we change the type of foo from `uint32_t` to `uint64_t`, but that won't happen
with UINT32_MAX)...
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Expression/IRExecutionUnit.cpp:306-307
"jit-object-" + module->getModuleIdentifier() + "-%%%.o";
- (void)llvm::sys::fs::createUniqueFile(object_name_model, fd,
result_path);
+ static_cast<void>(
+ llvm::sys::fs::createUniqueFile(object_name_model, fd, result_path));
llvm::raw_fd_ostream fds(fd, true);
----------------
I think this is overkill. `(void)` is used throughout llvm as a way to
explicitly ignore a value (usually done to supress some kind of a warning).
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72190/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72190
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
