similar to: [LLVMdev] C++ demangling in LLVM

On Jul 4, 2012, at 8:33 AM, Alexey Samsonov wrote: > Hello! > > We want to implement in-process symbolizer for {Address,Thread}Sanitizer testing tools that would be based on LLVM libraries. > I've noticed that llvm-nm (as well as other tools) doesn't demangle C++ names. Is it true, that LLVM doesn't have the code that is capable > of that, and if yes, are there any

On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com> wrote: > Hello! > > We want to implement in-process symbolizer for {Address,Thread}Sanitizer > testing tools that would be based on LLVM libraries. > I've noticed that llvm-nm (as well as other tools) doesn't demangle C++ > names. Is it true, that LLVM doesn't have the code that is capable

On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Michael Spencer <bigcheesegs at gmail.com>wrote: > On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com> > wrote: > > Hello! > > > > We want to implement in-process symbolizer for {Address,Thread}Sanitizer > > testing tools that would be based on LLVM libraries. > > I've noticed that llvm-nm

In the same way that the core LLVM libraries have support routines for DWARF, I think that both mangling and demangling should be provided as well. I suspect that the 'Support' library is the best we have, although eventually we need to split this library up a bit. That's not really your problem though. The bigger problem is that we don't have any good way of sharing code between

On Jul 4, 2012, at 12:43 PM, Michael Spencer wrote: > On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com> wrote: >> Hello! >> >> We want to implement in-process symbolizer for {Address,Thread}Sanitizer >> testing tools that would be based on LLVM libraries. >> I've noticed that llvm-nm (as well as other tools) doesn't demangle

Binutils and LLVM As part of "owning our own toolchain", various people have expressed an interest and have been working on creating various tools that duplicate the functionality of tools available on other systems. As a start, I'd like to summarize the current status, and ask people for help updating the list. List taken from <http://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/>

On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > In the same way that the core LLVM libraries have support routines for > DWARF, I think that both mangling and demangling should be provided as > well. I suspect that the 'Support' library is the best we have, although > eventually we need to split this library up a bit. That's not

On Nov 6, 2012, at 2:19 PM, Marshall Clow <mclow.lists at gmail.com> wrote: > Binutils and LLVM > > As part of "owning our own toolchain", various people have expressed an interest and have been working on creating various tools that duplicate the functionality of tools available on other systems. I have summarized the information that I've gathered, and put it up

On Jul 5, 2012, at 1:08 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > In the same way that the core LLVM libraries have support routines for DWARF, I think that both mangling and demangling should be provided as well. How would LLVM provide support for mangling? And what tools actually need it? I also wonder if we need more from a demangler than just a string. I know linker

Was there any resolution about if bringing this into the LLVM Support directory should be done or not? I have a need of being able to use this, not just for demangling, but also to verify correctness of a mangled function, and can only rely on LLVM core. Thanks, Micah > -----Original Message----- > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] > On Behalf

On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Alexey Samsonov <samsonov at google.com>wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 9:08 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>wrote: > >> In the same way that the core LLVM libraries have support routines for >> DWARF, I think that both mangling and demangling should be provided as >> well. I suspect that the 'Support'

If running ASan on the host architecture, we can symbolize output with: export LLVM_SYMBOLIZER_PATH=`which llvm-symbolizer` ./myInstrumentedProgram but on Android symbolizing is more complex. The bash script below is a "hello world" for symbolizing ASan output on Android. Is there a simpler way to do this? # Execute the test and save its output adb push

Thanks for letting me know that this is in the works. This is something that would make running ASan (and all other sanitizers I assume) quite a bit more appealing on Android. If there's anything I can do to help, please let me know. If you'd like to discuss in person, I'll be at the Developers' Meeting next week. -Greg On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Alexey Samsonov

On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote: > If running ASan on the host architecture, we can symbolize output with: > > export LLVM_SYMBOLIZER_PATH=`which llvm-symbolizer` > ./myInstrumentedProgram > > but on Android symbolizing is more complex. The bash script below is > a "hello world" for symbolizing ASan output

On 4/2/2014 12:23 PM, Nick Kledzik wrote: > On Apr 1, 2014, at 9:19 PM, Shankar Easwaran wrote: > >> Hi Nick, Bigcheese, >> >> When lld is used to link C++ code, it would be required to demangle symbol names by default/user driven option. >> >> The Gnu linker has the following options :- >> >> --demangle=[style] >> --no-demangle >>

Hi Nick, Bigcheese, When lld is used to link C++ code, it would be required to demangle symbol names by default/user driven option. The Gnu linker has the following options :- --demangle=[style] --no-demangle I found that clang/llvm-symbolizer use __cxx_demangle function. I would think that lld also need to call the same function, and I think the way we want to demangle is to have the

Hi, AFAIK, the tools "symbolizer, objdump and nm" need a demangler. I see there is libcxxabi which provides the demangle library. But there is no support to build libcxxabi on windows with MSVC. This left a huge void and my symbolizer cannot work on Windows if built with MSVC. Instead of mucking around OS dependencies, why shouldn't we have a demangle library in LLVM.

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > +Kate > > We already have two demangler implementations (LLDB and libcxxabi). I'd > rather not have three. Have you looked at the LLDB one? I think Kate has > some patches she hasn't had a chance to commit yet that add functionality. > I heard something

On Feb 14, 2014, at 1:09 PM, Howard Hinnant <hhinnant at apple.com> wrote: > Author: hhinnant > Date: Fri Feb 14 15:09:01 2014 > New Revision: 201432 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=201432&view=rev > Log: Remove myself as owner of libc++ > > Modified: > llvm/trunk/CODE_OWNERS.TXT > > Modified: llvm/trunk/CODE_OWNERS.TXT > URL:

In a discussion on IRC, Micheal was complaining about the semantics of StringSet, specifically how the iterators work. DannyB mentioned that we have a Trie class, so I decided to check it out. Lo and behold, I couldn't find _any_ uses of it, and when I deleted it from my system and did a clean rebuild, everything was fine. Looking at the log, the last substantial change to this class was in