Skip to content

[DebugInfo] Handle types with @_originallyDefinedIn in DebugInfo #77290

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 30, 2024

Conversation

augusto2112
Copy link
Contributor

When processing a nominal type that has the @_originallyDefinedIn attribute, IRGenDebugInfo emits a forward declaration of the type as a child of the original module, and the type with a specification pointing to the forward declaration. We do this so LLDB has enough information to both find the type in reflection metadata (the parent module name) and find it in the swiftmodule (the module name in the type mangled name).

rdar://137146961

When processing a nominal type that has the @_originallyDefinedIn attribute,
IRGenDebugInfo emits a forward declaration of the type as a child
of the original module, and the type with a specification pointing to
the forward declaration. We do this so LLDB has enough information to
both find the type in reflection metadata (the parent module name) and
find it in the swiftmodule (the module name in the type mangled name).

rdar://137146961
@augusto2112
Copy link
Contributor Author

@swift-ci smoke test

@augusto2112
Copy link
Contributor Author

@swift-ci smoke test windows

Copy link
Contributor

@nkcsgexi nkcsgexi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you!

@augusto2112 augusto2112 enabled auto-merge October 30, 2024 18:20
@augusto2112 augusto2112 merged commit cb205b6 into swiftlang:main Oct 30, 2024
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants