aprantl added a comment. I think in this case LLVM IR could be superior to x86 assembler since it is much shorter and easier to understand — even if we have to upgrade it from time to time. However, since this is explicitly testing for a DWARF feature, should we check the dwarfdump output that the attribute we are looking for is actually there?
================ Comment at: test/Shell/SymbolFile/DWARF/anon_class_w_and_wo_export_symbols.ll:1 +; This test verifies that we do the right thing with DIFlagExportSymbols which is the new +; behavioir and without the DIFlagExportSymbols which is the old behavior for the given ---------------- aprantl wrote: > de it from time to time. I think in this case LLVM IR could be superior to > x86 assembler since it is much shorter and easier to understand — even if we > have to upgrade it from time to time. However, since this is explicitly > testing for a DWARF feature, should we check the dwarfdump output that the > attribute we are looking for is actually there? [I don't know what happened to my comment here]. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D68961/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D68961 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
