jroelofs added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20119#431997, @rmaprath wrote:
> Addressing review comments from @jroelofs: > > - Moved the assertion in `libunwind.cpp` back to `UnwindCursor.cpp` where it > really belogs. > > @jroelofs: I just realized that, with this new native-only build of > `libunwind`, users of `libunwind.h` would have to explicitly `#define` the > flag `_LIBUNWIND_IS_NATIVE_ONLY` in order to get the header in-sync with the > library. I can't see an immediate problem if they don't define that flag > though, it's just that they'll end up passing larger buffers than the library > needs. Do you see a problem here? I'm not convinced it's a problem, (though possibly performance left on the table)... > 'libc++' uses a `__config_site` mechanism to wire the cmake build options > into the `__config` header. We can implement a similar mechanism in > `libunwind`, not sure if that's necessary here. I think that's the right way to go. Jon > WDYT? > > Thanks. > > / Asiri http://reviews.llvm.org/D20119 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
