teemperor accepted this revision. teemperor added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
In D72413#1811038 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72413#1811038>, @aprantl wrote: > In D72413#1810969 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72413#1810969>, @jingham wrote: > > > If we can't make a persistent expression state, are we going to be able to > > do anything useful with expressions? I don't see anything wrong here, but > > it seems like we should really be putting up a crunchy frog warning and > > erroring out of "expr"directly if we really can't make a type system. > > > I looked at that for a bit, but there is no obvious place where to early exit > without refactoring much more of ClangExpressionDeclMap. FWIW, you could also just add the check to `ClangUserExpression::ClangUserExpressionHelper::ResetDeclMap` and return a nullptr there. The API is designed to return a nullptr for utility expressions on that don't use the DeclMap. That's the only place in upstream LLDB where we construct a DeclMap with a target, so if there is a check there then the DeclMap doesn't need any further changes and we can just assume there is a persistent state in the rest of the code. But it doesn't really make the code much better, just this patch smaller. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D72413/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D72413 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
