aleksandr.urakov added a comment. It's a good point, thank you! I had the same thoughts when I done it, but I'm not completely sure. The problem is that an object file can't be completely responsible for choosing an unwind plan, because some plans are produced by symbol files (and an object file knows nothing about that, if I understand right). So we can move only a part of the plan-choosing-functionality from `FuncUnwinders` to `ObjectFile`s, but will it be better? In that case both `FuncUnwinders` and `ObjectFile`s will be responsible for managing plans, won't it add an additional complexity to the solution?
Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67347/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67347 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
