teemperor added a comment. In D74478#1874746 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D74478#1874746>, @jingham wrote:
> The only hesitation I have about this is if we are still printing this noise > in demangled names, then the name of the type you see for a variable will be > different from what you see when a method of that type ends up in a > backtrace. That might be confusing. OTOH, the correct solution to that > problem, IMO, is to remove the noise from backtraces, not keep it in the > types... I'm not entirely sure how/if we can make the backtraces nicer as we only have the function type (but not the specific function declaration with the name) and mangled/demangled name for them. Removing the `anonymous namespace` from the backtrace is doable with that, but inline namespaces and default template arguments (which are part of the radar) aren't possible unless we start doing much more work for the backtraces and figure out the actual FunctionDecls behind each function. FWIW, the current way we express backtraces is anyway not identical to what we show in variables. Any typedefs and so on are lost in the mangled name, so stepping into `std::string` member functions brings users to a backtrace with in `std::__1::basic_string<char, std::__1::char_traits<char>, std::__1::allocator<char> >::foo`. However printing the string shows them `std::__1::string`. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D74478/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D74478 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
