bulbazord wrote:
> You could also fix this by using:
>
> ```
> BreakpointCreateByName("next", lldb.eFunctionNameTypeFull,
> lldb.SBFileSpecList(), lldb.SBFileSpecList())
> ```
>
> instead. If you pass the current executable in the module list, that would
> also prevent finding a next symbol that happened to be in some other shared
> library.
>
> That's a little nicer since it adds a test for the Full breakpoint setting,
> which probably isn't as often used in the test suite as other ways of making
> breakpoints.
I find that reasoning quite compelling. Will update! :)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/174664
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
