jingham added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Interpreter/CommandInterpreter.cpp:2472
+ flags |= eHandleCommandFlagPrintErrors;
+ } else if (m_command_source_flags.back() & eHandleCommandFlagPrintErrors) {
+ flags |= eHandleCommandFlagPrintErrors;
----------------
JDevlieghere wrote:
> aprantl wrote:
> > Is `m_command_source_flags.empty() ||
> > Flags(m_command_source_flags.back()).Test(eHandleCommandFlagPrintErrors)`
> > better? Not sure.
> Personally I think this is easier to read, and consistent with what we do
> elsewhere. Happy to be convinced otherwise though :-)
I agree with Jonas, the original is easier to read.
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D61579/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D61579
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
