teemperor added inline comments.

================
Comment at: lldb/source/Target/AssertFrameRecognizer.cpp:152
+    ConstString func_name = sym_ctx.GetFunctionName();
+    if (func_name == ConstString(function_name) ||
+        alternate_function_name.empty() ||
----------------
JDevlieghere wrote:
> I believe someone added an overload for comparing ConstStrings with 
> StringRefs. We shouldn't have to pay the price of creating one here just for 
> comparison. Same below.
I really don't want a == overload for StringRef in `ConstString`. The *only* 
reason for using ConstString is using less memory for duplicate strings and 
being fast to compare against other ConstStrings. So if we add an overload for 
comparing against StringRef then code like this will look really innocent even 
though it essentially goes against the idea of ConstString. Either both string 
lists are using ConstString or neither does (which I would prefer). But having 
a list of normal strings and comparing it against ConstStrings usually means 
that the design is kinda flawed. Then we have both normal string comparisons 
but also the whole overhead of ConstString.

Looking at this patch we already construct at one point a ConstString from the 
function name at one point, so that might as well be a ConstString in the first 
place. If we had an implicit comparison than the conversion here would look 
really innocent and no one would notice.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D74252/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D74252



_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to