> > Any ideas how we can make these types of debug info tests > > more understandable to future devs? My only idea is copious comments, > but I > > feel like having some self-documenting system would be better and I just > > don't have any good ideas about what it would look like. > > Yeah, I'm not sure what it would look like - essentially the test > would have to reference constants from LLVM to describe the flags > combined into the flags field. (&, better than that, the ability to > specify just some part of the flags value that is of interest to a > particular test) > > Probably just adding comments of the form: > > ; test that the flags represent the 'protected' access modifier > ; 258 (flags) = 42 (thing1) | 157 (thing2) | (protected) 8 > > (I haven't actually looked up what constants are combined into the > flags value in this case)
That would work, an option for more self-documentation would be to have the debug output (e.g. [ DW_TAG_class_type ]) contain the access specifiers. -eric
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
