kwk added a comment. @labath I've applied all the ideas we ping-ponged yesterday and I decided to go with alternating the `target.inline-breakpoint-strategy` from `always` (the default) to `headers`. This way you can exactly see in the test file how things are behaving. So before going into the actual code review I'd like to ask you and @jingham to take a look at the test file. Is it the behavior described there the desired outcome? Then we can discuss the implementation.
================ Comment at: lldb/source/Breakpoint/BreakpointResolverName.cpp:320 + else + remove_it = false; + } ---------------- This is done on purpose to reverse the decision to remove a context for not passing a CU above. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D74136/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D74136 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
