I am going to move the constructor to private for now, this should eliminate any disagreement about whether to add null checks, as it is now literally impossible to construct one with a null pointer. For now this doesn't matter since nobody is even using the MemoryBuffer constructor except from internally. We can re-visit this in the future if we have need for external users to construct one with a MemoryBuffer.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 7:18 AM Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote: > I left out unit tests since we'd essentially be duplicating the unit tests > of MemoryBuffer, and because it involves the file system (also this is > temporary code until DataBuffer stuff goes away). Lmk if you disagree > though > On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 2:53 AM Pavel Labath via Phabricator < > revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > > labath added a comment. > > I am not sure if this is a voting situation, but I agree with what Zachary > said above. > > Since we're already speaking about tests, it looks like the new > DataBufferLLVM class could use a unit test or two, just so we get in the > habit of writing those. > > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D30054 > > > >
_______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
