aganea marked an inline comment as done.
aganea added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/include/llvm/DebugInfo/CodeView/CVRecord.h:29
+/// Carrying the size separately instead of trusting the size stored in the
+/// record prefix provides some extra safety and flexibility.
template <typename Kind> class CVRecord {
----------------
aganea wrote:
> To add to what you said in a comment above, do you think that if we could add
> `assert(Data.size() == ((RecordPrefix *)RecordData.data())->RecordPrefix +
> 2)` at relevant places below; and then after a while we could simply switch
> to `RecordPrefix *`, once issues are ironed out?
I didn't mean now.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D60018/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D60018
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
