C++: Support fully qualified field names in MaD#22088
Draft
MathiasVP wants to merge 4 commits into
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There's a small discrepancy between how Java and C# picks out a field in a MaD summary and how we do it in C++: In C++ we simply use the name of the field whereas Java and C# (and probably other languages as well. I didn't check this) use the fully qualified name of the field.
Using the fully qualified name is definitely the right approach as it precisely allows us to pick out the field that is being written to / read from, but we apparently missed that when we added MaD for C++.
This PR adds the ability for C++ to specify fully qualified names while keeping the old "just use the field name" around. Using the fully qualified name turns out to be crucial for some MaD summaries I'm working on for associative STL containers.
I tucked on a small one-line change in which nodes we hide in path explanations that we've been missing ever since we introduced MaD. We weren't hiding nodes that were supposed to be hidden, and caaed72 fixes that. It shouldn't change any results.