zturner added a comment. SBType storing a pair of CompilerType and TypeSP seems like a very confusing interface and like it will be very easy to misuse or violate assumptions (perhaps even assumptions that nobody knows exists). Why exactly is this necessary?
As far as I can tell, `SBType` uses `TypeImpl`, which supports having a `CompilerType`, a `TypeSP`, or both, but I cannot find any client of `TypeImpl` which actually depends on the `TypeSP` being set. Perhaps we can just delete support for `TypeSP` from `TypeImpl` entirely. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59217/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59217 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
