zturner added inline comments.
================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteClientBase.cpp:192
+ packet_result = ReadPacket(
+ response, std::chrono::duration_cast<std::chrono::microseconds>(
+ GetPacketTimeout())
----------------
`using namespace std` is generally frowned upon, but I wonder if we could be
more lenient about `using namespace std::chrono`? Would make a lot of those
code easier on the eyes.
================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteClientBase.cpp:193-194
+ response, std::chrono::duration_cast<std::chrono::microseconds>(
+ GetPacketTimeout())
+ .count(),
+ true);
----------------
Why do you need the `duration_cast` here? Can't you just pass in the result of
`GetPacketTimeout()`, where `GetPacketTimeout()` is updated to return a
`std::chrono::duration<int>`?
================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteCommunication.cpp:266-267
+ packet,
+ std::chrono::duration_cast<std::chrono::microseconds>(GetPacketTimeout())
+ .count(),
+ false);
----------------
Same here. You should just be able to pass the `duration` straight through,
and update `ReadPacket` to do the cast.
================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteCommunication.h:86
+ ScopedTimeout(GDBRemoteCommunication &gdb_comm,
+ std::chrono::seconds timeout);
~ScopedTimeout();
----------------
To make this more generic, this could be a `std::chrono::duration<int>`. If
for any reason someone wanted `3.2` seconds, they could then specify it.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D25391
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
