Standardize user-facing heap object ID rendering - #2934
Open
shamana-s wants to merge 3 commits into
Open
Conversation
|
|
Member
|
Thanks! I'm OoO on vacation for a bit, but I'll pick this up when I'm back. |
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
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Fixes #2866
Summary
This PR standardizes heap object ID rendering across Shark by introducing a shared formatting helper and using it consistently across user-facing output.
Object IDs are now rendered in both decimal and hexadecimal form:
This follows the formatting used by Android Studio's Memory Profiler while preserving the decimal ID that Shark APIs and the interactive CLI accept as input.
Changes
Long.asObjectIdString()as the shared object ID formatting helper.HeapObject.toString()to use the shared formatter.HeapGraph.findObjectById()"object not found" error message.Notes
As discussed in #2866,
ObjectDominators.renderDominatorTree()was intentionally left unchanged because the issue suggests deciding object index vs. object ID rendering separately.