tfiala added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D12651#241903, @zturner wrote:
> Cool, lgtm as well. Sorry for the holdup Absolutely no worries. Thanks for checking, Zachary! It would also be good if we could get either the --test-runner-name with "threading" or "mulltiprocessing" working on Windows at some point (i.e. look into that original failure when ctrl-c was added), if for no other reason than I suspect you'd get a performance win on Windows based on other platforms. You might also find, even if you're stuck with using the pool implementation, that "threading-pool" might just be faster than "multiprocessing-pool" on Windows. The threading-pool test runner strategy should be identical in behavior on Windows to the multiprocessing-pool strategy that you're using over there, with the diff of using "threading" rather than the "multiprocessing" module for the underlying implementation. I'll get this checked in. Thanks! http://reviews.llvm.org/D12651 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
