On 04/19/2018 08:22 PM, Jim Ingham wrote:
On Apr 19, 2018, at 10:54 AM, Greg Clayton wrote:
On Apr 19, 2018, at 10:35 AM, Jim Ingham wrote:
On Apr 19, 2018, at 9:44 AM, Greg Clayton via lldb-dev
wrote:
On Apr 19, 2018, at 6:51 AM, Zdenek Prikryl via lldb-dev
wrote:
Hi lldb d
The Address class may be suitable for the higher layers of lldb, but I
don't think the it can ever be a blanket replacement for lldb::addr_t. It
has way too much smartness built-in. We use addr_t in a lot of places that
don't/shouldn't care about Targets, ExecutionContexts or Sections. All of
lldb-
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37495
Bug ID: 37495
Summary: LLDB shows wrong results when execute 'register read'
at non-zero frame on Windows
Product: lldb
Version: 6.0
Hardware: PC
OS: Windows NT
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37496
Bug ID: 37496
Summary: Sometimes LLDB freeze after launching process
Product: lldb
Version: 6.0
Hardware: PC
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Prior
Greg, Jim, what's your opinion here?
What about having the class Address (pretty much as it is right now) and
the
struct AddressBase {
lldb::addr_t m_address;
lldb::as_t m_address_space;
...
}
Another question is, which classes/code should use Address, AddressBase,
and addr_t. Do you h
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37485
Stella Stamenova changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
