amccarth added a comment.
I think I agree with Jim that it would be better to propagate an error from
DoResume than to introduce CanResume. I could imagine situations where
DoResume could fail for a reason that CanResume was unable to predict. Having
one path for handling failure to resume seems cleaner.
Also, consider adding a test. I think it should be feasible to check the
process state after attempting to resume and getting an error.
================
Comment at: source/Commands/CommandObjectThread.cpp:778
+ if(!error.Success()) {
+ result.AppendMessage(error.AsCString());
----------------
Yeah, it looks like an oversight that the error was never checked, so this is
good.
Make sure to run `git clang-format` to fix those little formatting nits (like
the missing space after `if`.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37651
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
