jimingham wrote:

> I think the code is right and the test clever.
> 
> I had a suggestion for making it a little easier to read which you can take 
> or not as you wish. But I do think you need to add a comment as this is not 
> obvious.
> 
> Also, if this wouldn't also be fixed by resetting m_stopped_at_unexpected_bp 
> for every thread, even the ones we didn't allow to run, explain why to me 
> because it means I've missed something in thinking about the patch. I don't 
> think that's the right solution, but yours should be equivalent to clearing 
> them all on every resume and resetting them all on every stop.

Ah, okay.  That makes sense.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/174264
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to