oontvoo wrote: > This is definitely better than what you had before, but I still think it's > more complicated than it needs to be. For one, I'd like to understand why is > there a need for separate `TelemetryManager` and `TelemetryConfig` fields. If > the downstream implementation is going to be in charge of creating the > telemetry manager, why does it need to bother with calling > `SetTelemetryConfig`?
Sorry, missed this comment some how. Yeah, that's a good point. I've removed the new class and just define the static TelemetryManager::getInstance https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/126588 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
