labath added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20106#426224, @zturner wrote:
> It's too bad llvm doesn't have an equivalent of boost::any, because that > would be perfect here :-/ I actually think that a `std::function` is better here than an `any` type because it ensures type safety (even though `std::function` will use something equivalent to `any` underneath). What makes this API slightly cumbersome in my mind is the fact that we have 4 arguments which we are forwarding. If we condensed that into say 2 (pid, and a `struct StopInfo`), then I think it would be perfect. http://reviews.llvm.org/D20106 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
