wyt added a comment.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Analysis/FlowSensitive/DebugSupport.cpp:119-133
+ std::vector<std::pair<std::string, std::string>> LinesData;
+ for (auto &AtomAssignment : AtomAssignments) {
+ auto Name = getAtomName(AtomAssignment.first);
+ MaxNameLength = std::max(MaxNameLength, Name.size());
+ LinesData.push_back({Name, debugString(AtomAssignment.second)});
+ }
+ llvm::sort(LinesData.begin(), LinesData.end());
----------------
xazax.hun wrote:
> In its current form, I think you could create the final strings in one step
> and sort those strings instead of the pairs. Or do we expect alignment to
> mess up the order in that case?
> In its current form, I think you could create the final strings in one step
> and sort those strings instead of the pairs. Or do we expect alignment to
> mess up the order in that case?
Removed `LinesData` and the intermediate step of storing a pair of strings.
There is still a loop at the start of the function to find the max name length
for alignment purposes.
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Analysis/FlowSensitive/DebugSupportTest.cpp:230
+------------
+Unsatisfiable.
+
----------------
@xazax.hun
> I don't see a test case for `Unsatisfiable` constraints.
Here.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D129548/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D129548
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
