bulbazord added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
lldb/source/Plugins/ScriptInterpreter/Python/ScriptInterpreterPython.cpp:1316
+ auto_generated_function.AppendString(" def __user_code():");
+ for (int i = 0; i < num_lines; ++i) {
+ sstr.Clear();
----------------
delcypher wrote:
> Why do we need to loop over multiple lines in this is a "oneliner"?
>
> Is `num_lines == 1` equivalent to `is_oneliner`?
>
>
> If yes, then the `is_oneliner` parameter is not needed.
> If no, then `is_oneliner` should probably be renamed to make sure this
> confusion cannot be made.
+1
================
Comment at:
lldb/source/Plugins/ScriptInterpreter/Python/ScriptInterpreterPython.cpp:1330
+ } else {
+ return
Status("ScriptInterpreterPythonImpl::GenerateFunction(is_oneliner="
+ "false) = ERROR: python function is multiline.");
----------------
delcypher wrote:
> Why are we erroring here? It looks like this is something that the old code
> supported. I would is expect `is_oneliner` to imply there are multiple lines
> in which case shouldn't we support that here?
+1
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D144688/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D144688
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
