On 19 October 2016 at 18:39, Jim Ingham <jing...@apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 19, 2016, at 10:38 AM, Jim Ingham via lldb-commits
>> <lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 19, 2016, at 6:35 AM, Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
>>> <lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> ================
>>> Comment at: source/Plugins/Language/CPlusPlus/LibStdcppUniquePointer.cpp:110
>>> + if (name == ConstString("ptr") || name == ConstString("pointer")) return
>>> 2;
>>> + return UINT32_MAX;
>>> +}
>>> ----------------
>>> ~0 ?
>>>
>>
>> Everywhere else in lldb where we use the maximum of the size returned to
>> mean some error condition, we use UINT32_MAX. I actually think that's
>> clearer, and looks similar to places where we have other illegal value
>> defines, whereas this just looks like some odd computation. I don't think
>> this is a good change, and certainly not done in just one place.
>
> To be pedantic:
>
> UINT32_MAX -> <WHATEVER_SIZE>_MAX...
Yeah, I was mostly objecting to the value, I don't care how exactly
you represent it.
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
