werat added a comment.
Thanks for the explanation, this makes sense. I've checked the mailing list
archives and it seems there was already a discussion about the enumerators in
the `.debug_names` index back in 2018 --
http://lists.dwarfstd.org/pipermail/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org/2018-April/004
labath accepted this revision.
labath added a comment.
Looks good, modulo the inline comment.
Do you have commit access or you need someone to commit this for you?
Comment at:
lldb/source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteCommunicationServerLLGS.cpp:350
+ match_info.GetPro
Author: Pavel Labath
Date: 2021-01-10T21:59:16+01:00
New Revision: 13dea030b3d794d05a08dd0080c35844c9ca1b30
URL:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/13dea030b3d794d05a08dd0080c35844c9ca1b30
DIFF:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/13dea030b3d794d05a08dd0080c35844c9ca1b30.diff
augusto2112 added a comment.
> Looks good, modulo the inline comment.
Ok! Can I correct the issue pointed out on the comment on the next
(vAttachOrWait) patch?
> Do you have commit access or you need someone to commit this for you?
I don't, if one of you could do it that'd be great :)
Reposi
Thanks for all the context - so sounds like mostly based on (3) the
recommendation would be for this to be an API test (is there a way to test
the line table directly? good place for reference on the SB API options - I
looked at a few tests and they seemed quite different
( lldb/test/API/functional
JDevlieghere accepted this revision.
JDevlieghere added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D94357/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D94357
_
