cor3ntin added a comment. In D153536#4475240 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D153536#4475240>, @dblaikie wrote:
> In D153536#4475199 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D153536#4475199>, @cor3ntin > wrote: > >> In D153536#4474733 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D153536#4474733>, @dblaikie >> wrote: >> >>> Maybe try testing with more different values, to demonstrate which entities >>> the debugger is finding? >>> >>> int _ = 1; >>> int _ = 2; >>> { >>> int _ = 3; >>> int _ = 7; >>> } >>> >>> Or something like that. But, honestly, if the point is that these variables >>> should be unnameable - perhaps we shouldn't generate any DWARF for them? >> >> The variables should still be inspectable, ideally. It's true it makes no >> sense to be able to use them in expressions, and maybe if lldb use clang to >> evaluate expressions that would just work? > > I think that's going to be tricky - because we don't emit DWARF to say where > one variable's lifetime starts compared to another in the same scope - so > likely a debugger would just always show the first or last variable with the > same name in a given scope (so in the above example you could probably only > print {1,3} or {2,7}) - and getting it wrong is more likely and more > problematic than existing cases of shadowed variables. If we can't get this > right, which I don't think we can, practically speaking, at the moment (the > DWARF feature we'd have to support to do this better would probably be > `DW_AT_start_scope` to say at what instruction the lifetime of a variable > starts) - it may be best not to include it at all? It doesn't seems to be confused on simple examples cpp * thread #1, name = 'placeholder', stop reason = step in frame #0: 0x0000555555555157 placeholder`main at debug_placeholder.cpp:8:13 5 { 6 int _ = 4; 7 int _ = 5; -> 8 int _ = 6; 9 } 10 } (lldb) frame variable (int) _ = 1 (int) _ = 2 (int) _ = 3 (int) _ = 4 (int) _ = 5 (int) _ = -9432 That being said, if you think it's more prudent, I would not mind Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D153536/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D153536 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
