freenode/#clasp - IRC Chatlog
Search
17:13:08
Bike
i think i see how to add debug info for variables. not much different from the existing thing for parameters
18:03:13
drmeister
Hi - what should the source info correspond to? Variables are alive in code ranges- right?
18:18:14
Bike
https://llvm.org/doxygen/classllvm_1_1DIBuilder.html#ae6081972b0560d0f16bd503654924b1b
18:22:04
drmeister
Does this need value numbering - to identify which lexical locations are equivalent?
18:22:41
Bike
i want to put in some debug info for a variable. i need a line number of some kind. binding point seems obvious to me. that's it.
18:22:58
Bike
i don't think llvm requires the line number to be anything in particular, since it's just what's given to the debugger
19:29:17
drmeister
stassats: If you have a moment - what do you feel about having the slime function compile-string-from-emacs pass the line number to swank-compile-string?
19:31:53
stassats
well, to work with a slime folk (me) you gotta do figure things out as i'm bored by slime
19:36:46
drmeister
We figured it out, it would be a simple change - but it looks like we either change every implementation file's version of swank-compile-string to accept a :line-no keyword argument - or fiddle with defimplementation to add &allow-other-keys and potentially weaken the compilers ability to catch bad keyword arguments down the road.
19:38:02
drmeister
From a human engineering point of view - is it ok to change every implementation of swank-compile-string for every swank backend? I'm fine changing slime/swank/clasp.lisp but will someone throw a fit if I change slime/swank/sbcl.lisp.
19:38:37
drmeister
It is ok to change sbcl.lisp - but will armed bears come after me if I change abcl.lisp.
19:43:30
drmeister
You da man. I posted the question to the issue and I'll see what other folks feel. I would also submit this as a pull request.