jimingham wrote: I also think in the long run we need a more flexible procedure. After all, you might be doing a backwards direction next, but hit a breakpoint while doing that. You then want to step FORWARDS from that breakpoint to check something out. Then if stepping backwards and forwards were working like lldb stepping currently works, you'd expect "continue" to return control to the backwards next to finish out the operation.
So I don't think in the long run we should be kicking all backwards plans off the stack when we start to go forwards. I think instead we should use the IsPlanStale mechanism to tell when a backwards plan can no longer do its job. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112079 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
