-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 339
[lldb] Use reflection to get the dynamic type of a class #3204
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[lldb] Use reflection to get the dynamic type of a class #3204
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great work!
if (objc_runtime->GetDynamicTypeAndAddress( | ||
in_value, use_dynamic, class_type_or_name, address, value_type)) { | ||
bool found = false; | ||
ForEachSuperClassType(in_value, [&](SuperClassType sc) -> bool { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you add a comment here explaining why we are filtering out private Foundation types?
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ | |||
// REQUIRES: system-darwin | |||
// REQUIRES: swift | |||
|
|||
// RUN: %lldb --repl < %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s | |||
// RUN: %lldb --repl < %s | FileCheck %s |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why do we need to filter out stderr output?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some unrelated warnings were making this test fail, so I thought I'd remove stderr since that's not what the test is checking for.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, yeah. It doesn't seem to be necessary given the CHECK lines.
375a0fa
to
824e91c
Compare
@swift-ci test |
@swift-ci test |
1 similar comment
@swift-ci test |
Ran tests locally and don't see any failures caused by this PR |
No description provided.