shafik added inline comments.
================ Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/expression_command/argument_passing_restrictions/main.cpp:22 + bounds.y = 2; + return; + } ---------------- aprantl wrote: > what's the point of the return? This is vestigial return left over from when the reproducer was more complex. ================ Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/expression_command/argument_passing_restrictions/main.cpp:40 + return Shape::empty_shape()->bounds().x; // break here +} ---------------- teemperor wrote: > Some small things: > 1. I think the source here is not clang-formatted :) > 2. It's not really clear to me if Shape or Bounds are supposed to have arg > passing restrictions (or both?). Maybe rename them or comment this in the > source. E.g. `// supposed to be passed by ref/value`. > 3. Can this test be more minimized? Do we need both x and y as member > variables? Do we need all these methods and variables? Especially when debug > stepping through this test case at some point a minimized test case is always > nicer. I am adding comments to the code to try to address what it is trying to catch. I have tried to simplify as much as possible but the scenario is rather elaborate. I don't need both `x` and `y` though. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61146/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61146 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
