[lldb] Part 2 of 2 - Refactor `CommandObject::DoExecute(...)` return `void` (not `bool`) (#69991)

[lldb] Part 2 of 2 - Refactor `CommandObject::DoExecute(...)` to return
`void` instead of ~~`bool`~

[lldb] Part 2 of 2 - Refactor `CommandObject::DoExecute(...)` return `void` (not `bool`) (#69991)

[lldb] Part 2 of 2 - Refactor `CommandObject::DoExecute(...)` to return
`void` instead of ~~`bool`~~

Justifications:
- The code doesn't ultimately apply the `true`/`false` return values.
- The methods already pass around a `CommandReturnObject`, typically
with a `result` parameter.
- Each command return object already contains:
- A more precise status
- The error code(s) that apply to that status

Part 1 refactors the `CommandObject::Execute(...)` method.
- See
[https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/69989](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/69989)

rdar://117378957

show more ...

[lldb] Delay removal of persistent results

Follow up to "Suppress persistent result when running po" (D144044).

This change delays removal of the persistent result until after `Dump` has been calle

[lldb] Delay removal of persistent results

Follow up to "Suppress persistent result when running po" (D144044).

This change delays removal of the persistent result until after `Dump` has been called.
In doing so, the persistent result is available for the purpose of getting its object
description.

In the original change, the persistent result removal happens indirectly, by setting
`EvaluateExpressionOptions::SetSuppressPersistentResult`. In practice this has worked,
however this exposed a latent bug in swift-lldb. The subtlety, and the bug, depend on
when the persisteted result variable is removed.

When the result is removed via `SetSuppressPersistentResult`, it happens within the call
to `Target::EvaluateExpression`. That is, by the time the call returns, the persistent
result is already removed.

The issue occurs shortly thereafter, when `ValueObject::Dump` is called, it cannot make
use of the persistent result variable (instead it uses the `ValueObjectConstResult`). In
swift-lldb, this causes an additional expression evaluation to happen. It first tries an
expression that reference `$R0` etc, but that always fails because `$R0` is removed. The
fallback to this failure does work most of the time, but there's at least one bug
involving imported Clang types.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D150619

show more ...

Recommit [lldb] Change dwim-print to default to disabled persistent results

Change `dwim-print` to now disable persistent results by default, unless requested by
the user with the `--persistent-resu

Recommit [lldb] Change dwim-print to default to disabled persistent results

Change `dwim-print` to now disable persistent results by default, unless requested by
the user with the `--persistent-result` flag.

Ex:

```
(lldb) dwim-print 1 + 1
(int) 2
(lldb) dwim-print --persistent-result on -- 1 + 1
(int) $0 = 2
```

Users who wish to enable persistent results can make and use an alias that includes
`--persistent-result on`.

Updates: To recommit this, both TestPersistentResult.py and TestPAlias.py needed to be
updated, as well as the changes in D146230.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D145609

show more ...

Revert "[lldb] Change dwim-print to default to disabled persistent results"

This reverts commit 8bad4ae679df6fc7dbd016dccbd3da34206e836b.

[lldb] Change dwim-print to default to disabled persistent results

Change `dwim-print` to now disable persistent results by default, unless requested by
the user with the `--persistent-result` flag.

[lldb] Change dwim-print to default to disabled persistent results

Change `dwim-print` to now disable persistent results by default, unless requested by
the user with the `--persistent-result` flag.

Ex:

```
(lldb) dwim-print 1 + 1
(int) 2
(lldb) dwim-print --persistent-result on -- 1 + 1
(int) $0 = 2
```

Users who wish to enable persistent results can make and use an alias that includes
`--persistent-result on`.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D145609

show more ...

[lldb] Make persisting result variables configurable

Context: The `expression` command uses artificial variables to store the expression
result. This result variable is unconditionally kept around a

[lldb] Make persisting result variables configurable

Context: The `expression` command uses artificial variables to store the expression
result. This result variable is unconditionally kept around after the expression command
has completed. These variables are known as persistent results. These are the variables
`$0`, `$1`, etc, that are displayed when running `p` or `expression`.

This change allows users to control whether result variables are persisted, by
introducing a `--persistent-result` flag.

This change keeps the current default behavior, persistent results are created by
default. This change gives users the ability to opt-out by re-aliasing `p`. For example:

```
command unalias p
command alias p expression --persistent-result false --
```

For consistency, this flag is also adopted by `dwim-print`. Of note, if asked,
`dwim-print` will create a persistent result even for frame variables.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D144230

show more ...

[lldb] Add expression command options in dwim-print

Adopt `expression`'s options in `dwim-print`.

This is primarily added to support the `--language`/`-l` flag.

Differential Revision: https://revi

[lldb] Add expression command options in dwim-print

Adopt `expression`'s options in `dwim-print`.

This is primarily added to support the `--language`/`-l` flag.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D144114

show more ...

[lldb] Mark expressions that couldn't be parsed or executed as failed expressions

Summary:
LLDB keeps statistics of how many expression evaluations are 'successful' and 'failed'
which are updated af

[lldb] Mark expressions that couldn't be parsed or executed as failed expressions

Summary:
LLDB keeps statistics of how many expression evaluations are 'successful' and 'failed'
which are updated after each expression evaluation (assuming statistics are enabled).
From what I understand the idea is that this could be used to define how well LLDB's
expression evaluator is working.

Currently all expressions are considered successful unless the user passes an explicit
positive element counting to the expression command (with the `-Z` flag) and then passes
an expression that successfully evaluates to a type that doesn't support element counting.
Expressions that fail to parse, execute or any other outcome are considered successful
at the moment which means we nearly always have a 100% expression evaluation
success rate.

This patch makes that expressions that fail to parse or execute to count as failed
expressions.

We can't know whether the expression failed because of an user error
of because LLDB couldn't correctly parse/compile it, but I would argue that this is
still an improvement. Assuming that the percentage of valid user expressions stays
mostly constant over time (which seems like a reasonable assumption), then this
way we can still see if we are doing relatively better/worse from release to release.

Reviewers: davide, aprantl, JDevlieghere

Reviewed By: aprantl

Subscribers: abidh

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76280

show more ...

[lldb] Ptrs->refs in CommandObjectExpression::EvaluateExpression parameters

The error_stream and result parameter were inconsistently checked for
being null, so we might as well make them references

[lldb] Ptrs->refs in CommandObjectExpression::EvaluateExpression parameters

The error_stream and result parameter were inconsistently checked for
being null, so we might as well make them references instead of crashing
in case someone passes a nullptr and hits one of the code paths that are
currently not doing a nullptr check on those parameters. Also change
output_stream for consistency.

show more ...

[lldb][NFC] Refactor our option generation out of EvaluateExpression

[lldb] Update header guards to be consistent and compliant with LLVM (NFC)

LLDB has a few different styles of header guards and they're not very
consistent because things get moved around or copy/pa

[lldb] Update header guards to be consistent and compliant with LLVM (NFC)

LLDB has a few different styles of header guards and they're not very
consistent because things get moved around or copy/pasted. This patch
unifies the header guards across LLDB and converts everything to match
LLVM's style.

Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74743

show more ...

[lldb][NFC] Remove unnecessary includes in source/Commands

Summary: This removes most of unnecessary includes in the `source/Commands` directory. This was generated by IWYU and a script that fixed a

[lldb][NFC] Remove unnecessary includes in source/Commands

Summary: This removes most of unnecessary includes in the `source/Commands` directory. This was generated by IWYU and a script that fixed all the bogus reports from IWYU. Patch is tested on Linux and macOS.

Reviewers: JDevlieghere

Reviewed By: JDevlieghere

Subscribers: krytarowski, lldb-commits

Tags: #lldb

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71489

show more ...

[lldb][NFC] Remove WordComplete mode, make result array indexed from 0 and remove any undocumented/redundant return values

Summary:
We still have some leftovers of the old completion API in the inte

[lldb][NFC] Remove WordComplete mode, make result array indexed from 0 and remove any undocumented/redundant return values

Summary:
We still have some leftovers of the old completion API in the internals of
LLDB that haven't been replaced by the new CompletionRequest. These leftovers
are:

* The return values (int/size_t) in all completion functions.
* Our result array that starts indexing at 1.
* `WordComplete` mode.

I didn't replace them back then because it's tricky to figure out what exactly they
are used for and the completion code is relatively untested. I finally got around
to writing more tests for the API and understanding the semantics, so I think it's
a good time to get rid of them.

A few words why those things should be removed/replaced:

* The return values are really cryptic, partly redundant and rarely documented.
They are also completely ignored by Xcode, so whatever information they contain will end up
breaking Xcode's completion mechanism. They are also partly impossible to even implement
as we assign negative values special meaning and our completion API sometimes returns size_t.

Completion functions are supposed to return -2 to rewrite the current line. We seem to use this
in some untested code path to expand the history repeat character to the full command, but
I haven't figured out why that doesn't work at the moment.
Completion functions return -1 to 'insert the completion character', but that isn't implemented
(even though we seem to activate this feature in LLDB sometimes).
All positive values have to match the number of results. This is obviously just redundant information
as the user can just look at the result list to get that information (which is what Xcode does).

* The result array that starts indexing at 1 is obviously unexpected. The first element of the array is
reserved for the common prefix of all completions (e.g. "foobar" and "footar" -> "foo"). The idea is
that we calculate this to make the life of the API caller easier, but obviously forcing people to have
1-based indices is not helpful (or even worse, forces them to manually copy the results to make it
0-based like Xcode has to do).

* The `WordComplete` mode indicates that LLDB should enter a space behind the completion. The
idea is that we let the top-level API know that we just provided a full completion. Interestingly we
`WordComplete` is just a single bool that somehow represents all N completions. And we always
provide full completions in LLDB, so in theory it should always be true.
The only use it currently serves is providing redundant information about whether we have a single
definitive completion or not (which we already know from the number of results we get).

This patch essentially removes `WordComplete` mode and makes the result array indexed from 0.
It also removes all return values from all internal completion functions. The only non-redundant information
they contain is about rewriting the current line (which is broken), so that functionality was moved
to the CompletionRequest API. So you can now do `addCompletion("blub", "description", CompletionMode::RewriteLine)`
to do the same.

For the SB API we emulate the old behaviour by making the array indexed from 1 again with the common
prefix at index 0. I didn't keep the special negative return codes as we either never sent them before (e.g. -2) or we
didn't even implement them in the Editline handler (e.g. -1).

I tried to keep this patch minimal and I'm aware we can probably now even further simplify a bunch of related code,
but I would prefer doing this in follow-up NFC commits

Reviewers: JDevlieghere

Reviewed By: JDevlieghere

Subscribers: arphaman, abidh, lldb-commits

Tags: #lldb

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66536

llvm-svn: 369624

show more ...

[lldb] NFC modernize codebase with modernize-use-nullptr

Summary:
NFC = [[ https://llvm.org/docs/Lexicon.html#nfc | Non functional change ]]

This commit is the result of modernizing the LLDB codeba

[lldb] NFC modernize codebase with modernize-use-nullptr

Summary:
NFC = [[ https://llvm.org/docs/Lexicon.html#nfc | Non functional change ]]

This commit is the result of modernizing the LLDB codebase by using
`nullptr` instread of `0` or `NULL`. See
https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-use-nullptr.html
for more information.

This is the command I ran and I to fix and format the code base:

```
run-clang-tidy.py \
-header-filter='.*' \
-checks='-*,modernize-use-nullptr' \
-fix ~/dev/llvm-project/lldb/.* \
-format \
-style LLVM \
-p ~/llvm-builds/debug-ninja-gcc
```

NOTE: There were also changes to `llvm/utils/unittest` but I did not
include them because I felt that maybe this library shall be updated in
isolation somehow.

NOTE: I know this is a rather large commit but it is a nobrainer in most
parts.

Reviewers: martong, espindola, shafik, #lldb, JDevlieghere

Reviewed By: JDevlieghere

Subscribers: arsenm, jvesely, nhaehnle, hiraditya, JDevlieghere, teemperor, rnkovacs, emaste, kubamracek, nemanjai, ki.stfu, javed.absar, arichardson, kbarton, jrtc27, MaskRay, atanasyan, dexonsmith, arphaman, jfb, jsji, jdoerfert, lldb-commits, llvm-commits

Tags: #lldb, #llvm

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61847

llvm-svn: 361484

show more ...

[NFC] Remove ASCII lines from comments

A lot of comments in LLDB are surrounded by an ASCII line to delimit the
begging and end of the comment.

Its use is not really consistent across the code base

[NFC] Remove ASCII lines from comments

A lot of comments in LLDB are surrounded by an ASCII line to delimit the
begging and end of the comment.

Its use is not really consistent across the code base, sometimes the
lines are longer, sometimes they are shorter and sometimes they are
omitted. Furthermore, it looks kind of weird with the 80 column limit,
where the comment actually extends past the line, but not by much.
Furthermore, when /// is used for Doxygen comments, it looks
particularly odd. And when // is used, it incorrectly gives the
impression that it's actually a Doxygen comment.

I assume these lines were added to improve distinguishing between
comments and code. However, given that todays editors and IDEs do a
great job at highlighting comments, I think it's worth to drop this for
the sake of consistency. The alternative is fixing all the
inconsistencies, which would create a lot more churn.

Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60508

llvm-svn: 358135

show more ...

Update the file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo
to reflect the new license.

We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the ne

Update the file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo
to reflect the new license.

We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.

Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.

llvm-svn: 351636

show more ...

Remove header grouping comments.

This patch removes the comments grouping header includes. They were
added after running IWYU over the LLDB codebase. However they add little
value, are often outdate

Remove header grouping comments.

This patch removes the comments grouping header includes. They were
added after running IWYU over the LLDB codebase. However they add little
value, are often outdates and burdensome to maintain.

llvm-svn: 346626

show more ...

Clean-up usage of OptionDefinition arrays

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52604

llvm-svn: 343348

Added initial code completion support for the `expr` command

Summary:
This patch adds initial code completion support for the `expr` command.

We now have a completion handler in the expression Comm

Added initial code completion support for the `expr` command

Summary:
This patch adds initial code completion support for the `expr` command.

We now have a completion handler in the expression CommandObject that
essentially just attempts to parse the given user expression with Clang with
an attached code completion consumer. We filter and prepare the
code completions provided by Clang and send them back to the completion
API.

The current completion is limited to variables that are in the current scope.
This includes local variables and all types used by local variables. We however
don't do any completion of symbols that are not used in the local scope (or
in some other way already in the ASTContext).

This is partly because there is not yet any code that manually searches for additiona
information in the debug information. Another cause is that for some reason the existing
code for loading these additional symbols when requested by Clang doesn't seem to work.
This will be fixed in a future patch.

Reviewers: jingham, teemperor

Reviewed By: teemperor

Subscribers: labath, aprantl, JDevlieghere, friss, lldb-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48465

llvm-svn: 341086

show more ...

Get rid of the C-string parameter in DoExecute

Summary:
This patch gets rid of the C-string parameter in the RawCommandObject::DoExecute function,
making the code simpler and less memory unsafe.

Th

Get rid of the C-string parameter in DoExecute

Summary:
This patch gets rid of the C-string parameter in the RawCommandObject::DoExecute function,
making the code simpler and less memory unsafe.

There seems to be a assumption in some command objects that this parameter could be a nullptr,
but from what I can see the rest of the API doesn't actually allow this (and other command
objects and related code pieces dereference this parameter without any checks).

Especially CommandObjectRegexCommand has error handling code for a nullptr that is now gone.

Reviewers: davide, jingham, teemperor

Reviewed By: teemperor

Subscribers: jingham, lldb-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49207

llvm-svn: 336955

show more ...

Rename Error -> Status.

This renames the LLDB error class to Status, as discussed
on the lldb-dev mailing list.

A change of this magnitude cannot easily be done without
find and replace, but that h

Rename Error -> Status.

This renames the LLDB error class to Status, as discussed
on the lldb-dev mailing list.

A change of this magnitude cannot easily be done without
find and replace, but that has potential to catch unwanted
occurrences of common strings such as "Error". Every effort
was made to find all the obvious things such as the word "Error"
appearing in a string, etc, but it's possible there are still
some lingering occurences left around. Hopefully nothing too
serious.

llvm-svn: 302872

show more ...

Make Options::SetOptionValue take a StringRef.

llvm-svn: 286723

Update OptionGroup::SetValue to take StringRef.

Then deal with all the fallout.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24847

llvm-svn: 282265

Convert option tables to ArrayRefs.

This change is very mechanical. All it does is change the
signature of `Options::GetDefinitions()` and `OptionGroup::
GetDefinitions()` to return an `ArrayRef<Op

Convert option tables to ArrayRefs.

This change is very mechanical. All it does is change the
signature of `Options::GetDefinitions()` and `OptionGroup::
GetDefinitions()` to return an `ArrayRef<OptionDefinition>`
instead of a `const OptionDefinition *`. In the case of the
former, it deletes the sentinel entry from every table, and
in the case of the latter, it removes the `GetNumDefinitions()`
method from the interface. These are no longer necessary as
`ArrayRef` carries its own length.

In the former case, iteration was done by using a sentinel
entry, so there was no knowledge of length. Because of this
the individual option tables were allowed to be defined below
the corresponding class (after all, only a pointer was needed).
Now, however, the length must be known at compile time to
construct the `ArrayRef`, and as a result it is necessary to
move every option table before its corresponding class. This
results in this CL looking very big, but in terms of substance
there is not much here.

Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24834

llvm-svn: 282188

show more ...

*** This commit represents a complete reformatting of the LLDB source code
*** to conform to clang-format’s LLVM style. This kind of mass change has
*** two obvious implications:

Firstly, merging t

*** This commit represents a complete reformatting of the LLDB source code
*** to conform to clang-format’s LLVM style. This kind of mass change has
*** two obvious implications:

Firstly, merging this particular commit into a downstream fork may be a huge
effort. Alternatively, it may be worth merging all changes up to this commit,
performing the same reformatting operation locally, and then discarding the
merge for this particular commit. The commands used to accomplish this
reformatting were as follows (with current working directory as the root of
the repository):

find . \( -iname "*.c" -or -iname "*.cpp" -or -iname "*.h" -or -iname "*.mm" \) -exec clang-format -i {} +
find . -iname "*.py" -exec autopep8 --in-place --aggressive --aggressive {} + ;

The version of clang-format used was 3.9.0, and autopep8 was 1.2.4.

Secondly, “blame” style tools will generally point to this commit instead of
a meaningful prior commit. There are alternatives available that will attempt
to look through this change and find the appropriate prior commit. YMMV.

llvm-svn: 280751

show more ...