davide added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lldb/source/Commands/CommandObjectStats.cpp:43-46 + target->RegisterStats(StatisticKind::ExpressionSuccessful); + target->RegisterStats(StatisticKind::ExpressionFailure); + target->RegisterStats(StatisticKind::FrameVarSuccess); + target->RegisterStats(StatisticKind::FrameVarFailure); ---------------- labath wrote: > davide wrote: > > labath wrote: > > > Are you planning to have some kind of decentralized method of registering > > > statistics? > > > If not, then I don't see a need for explicitly registering the statistic > > > kinds here, since the single source of truth about the available kinds > > > can be StatisticKind enum, and Target can just get the list from there > > > automatically when need (when stats are enabled?) > > > > > > This way we could even simplify the code by avoiding the "statistic is > > > not registered but someone still called IncrementStats" state altogether) > > > and the stats map could be a simple array with NumStatistics elements. > > No. I originally thought to make it that way but I have to say that maybe > > it's easier to have a centralized mechanism. I'm still unsure whether this > > should be a vector or a map, I'll think about it more. > llvm manual recommends > <http://llvm.org/docs/ProgrammersManual.html#map-like-containers-std-map-densemap-etc> > vector as a first choice data structure for a map. :P Allright, you convinced me :) https://reviews.llvm.org/D45547 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
