JDevlieghere added a comment.
LGTM if the answer to both my questions is "yes".
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Utility/ArchSpec.cpp:1399
bool ArchSpec::IsFullySpecifiedTriple() const {
- const auto &user_specified_triple = GetTriple();
-
- bool user_triple_fully_specified = false;
-
- if ((user_specified_triple.getOS() != llvm::Triple::UnknownOS) ||
- TripleOSWasSpecified()) {
- if ((user_specified_triple.getVendor() != llvm::Triple::UnknownVendor) ||
- TripleVendorWasSpecified()) {
- const unsigned unspecified = 0;
- if (!user_specified_triple.isOSDarwin() ||
- user_specified_triple.getOSMajorVersion() != unspecified) {
- user_triple_fully_specified = true;
- }
- }
- }
+ if (!TripleOSWasSpecified())
+ return false;
----------------
Are you sure that `TripleOSWasSpecified() == user_specified_triple.getOS() !=
llvm::Triple::UnknownOS`. Was the check in the original code redundant? Looking
at the implementation
```
bool TripleOSWasSpecified() const { return !m_triple.getOSName().empty(); }
```
I guess this is identical? But when dealing with triples it's probably worth
double checking.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Utility/ArchSpec.cpp:1402
+
+ if (!TripleVendorWasSpecified())
+ return false;
----------------
Same for the vendor.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D122912/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D122912
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
