1756630dfa
Summary:
According to [C128] "Virtual functions should specify exactly one
of `virtual`, `override`, or `final`", I've added override where a
virtual function is overriden but the explicit `override` keyword
was missing. Whenever both `virtual` and `override` were specified,
I removed `virtual`. As C.128 puts it:
> [...] writing more than one of these three is both redundant and
> a potential source of errors.
I anticipate a discussion about whether or not to add `override` to
destructors but I went for it because of an example in [ISOCPP1000].
Let me repeat the comment for you here:
Consider this code:
```
struct Base {
virtual ~Base(){}
};
struct SubClass : Base {
~SubClass() {
std::cout << "It works!\n";
}
};
int main() {
std::unique_ptr<Base> ptr = std::make_unique<SubClass>();
}
```
If for some odd reason somebody removes the `virtual` keyword from the
`Base` struct, the code will no longer print `It works!`. So adding
`override` to destructors actively protects us from accidentally
breaking our code at runtime.
[C128]: https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppCoreGuidelines.md#c128-virtual-functions-should-specify-exactly-one-of-virtual-override-or-final
[ISOCPP1000]: https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/issues/1000#issuecomment-476951555
Reviewers: teemperor, JDevlieghere, davide, shafik
Reviewed By: teemperor
Subscribers: kwk, arphaman, kadircet, lldb-commits
Tags: #lldb
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61440
llvm-svn: 359868
76 lines
2.2 KiB
C++
76 lines
2.2 KiB
C++
//===-- ProcessInstanceInfoTest.cpp -----------------------------*- C++ -*-===//
|
|
//
|
|
// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
|
|
// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
|
|
// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
|
|
//
|
|
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
|
|
|
|
#include "lldb/Target/Process.h"
|
|
#include "gtest/gtest.h"
|
|
|
|
using namespace lldb_private;
|
|
|
|
namespace {
|
|
/// A very simple resolver which fails for even ids and returns a simple string
|
|
/// for odd ones.
|
|
class DummyUserIDResolver : public UserIDResolver {
|
|
protected:
|
|
llvm::Optional<std::string> DoGetUserName(id_t uid) override {
|
|
if (uid % 2)
|
|
return ("user" + llvm::Twine(uid)).str();
|
|
return llvm::None;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
llvm::Optional<std::string> DoGetGroupName(id_t gid) override {
|
|
if (gid % 2)
|
|
return ("group" + llvm::Twine(gid)).str();
|
|
return llvm::None;
|
|
}
|
|
};
|
|
} // namespace
|
|
|
|
TEST(ProcessInstanceInfo, Dump) {
|
|
ProcessInstanceInfo info("a.out", ArchSpec("x86_64-pc-linux"), 47);
|
|
info.SetUserID(1);
|
|
info.SetEffectiveUserID(2);
|
|
info.SetGroupID(3);
|
|
info.SetEffectiveGroupID(4);
|
|
|
|
DummyUserIDResolver resolver;
|
|
StreamString s;
|
|
info.Dump(s, resolver);
|
|
EXPECT_STREQ(R"( pid = 47
|
|
name = a.out
|
|
file = a.out
|
|
arch = x86_64-pc-linux
|
|
uid = 1 (user1)
|
|
gid = 3 (group3)
|
|
euid = 2 ()
|
|
egid = 4 ()
|
|
)",
|
|
s.GetData());
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
TEST(ProcessInstanceInfo, DumpTable) {
|
|
ProcessInstanceInfo info("a.out", ArchSpec("x86_64-pc-linux"), 47);
|
|
info.SetUserID(1);
|
|
info.SetEffectiveUserID(2);
|
|
info.SetGroupID(3);
|
|
info.SetEffectiveGroupID(4);
|
|
|
|
DummyUserIDResolver resolver;
|
|
StreamString s;
|
|
|
|
const bool show_args = false;
|
|
const bool verbose = true;
|
|
ProcessInstanceInfo::DumpTableHeader(s, show_args, verbose);
|
|
info.DumpAsTableRow(s, resolver, show_args, verbose);
|
|
EXPECT_STREQ(
|
|
R"(PID PARENT USER GROUP EFF USER EFF GROUP TRIPLE ARGUMENTS
|
|
====== ====== ========== ========== ========== ========== ======================== ============================
|
|
47 0 user1 group3 2 4 x86_64-pc-linux
|
|
)",
|
|
s.GetData());
|
|
}
|