jimingham wrote: It seems a bit weird to have an Execution context with a thread and a stack frame but not the process they belong to. I think it's easier to deal with it when we hand them out.
Jim > On Sep 9, 2023, at 11:57 AM, Greg Clayton ***@***.***> wrote: > > > @clayborg commented on this pull request. > > A different way to approach this fix is to just fix ExecutionContext so that > this can never be out of date by removing the "m_process_sp" member variable. > Is is not great that we can an execution context that has an older process, > and would we ever want an ExecutionContext to be able to have a mismatched > process? If we remove m_process_sp, we can always get the process from the > m_target_sp and then we can never get it wrong that way and we might avoid > some of the changes in this patch? Lemme know what you think as It would be > good to make sure our ExecutionContext variables can't get the wrong info. > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/65822#pullrequestreview-1618683673>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADUPVW5VHULVKS5IW4BFKQ3XZS3ZTANCNFSM6AAAAAA4RAWCQY>. > You are receiving this because you authored the thread. > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/65822 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
