JDevlieghere added a comment. In D121484#3379564 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121484#3379564>, @labath wrote:
> In D121484#3379532 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121484#3379532>, @JDevlieghere > wrote: > >> In D121484#3378923 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121484#3378923>, @labath wrote: >> >>> I'm not sure what would be a good way to denote that the new argument >>> represents the architecture of the host running the debugged process, and >>> not the one running lldb. This isn't helped by the fact that some of the >>> darwin platforms use `GetSystemArchitecture` in their implementations >>> (which, afaict, does mean the lldb host architecture). Having at least a >>> comment would be nice. >> >> Maybe `platform_host_architecture` > > Maybe. Maybe even `process_host_architecture`. But that's quite a mouthful. I prefer being verbose over ambiguous. Let's go with this. >> or `platform_architecture`? > > That still sounds confusing to me. Agreed. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D121484/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D121484 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
