oontvoo wrote: > I'm not really sure what to think about this. You call it "client telemetry", > which sounds generic, but the implementation (mainly, the "request" field) > sounds very specific to lldb-dap (not every lldb "client" needs to have a > "request", or even if it has, the term "request" may mean something very > different for it.
How about renaming it to "client_data"? (We'd record both the request's command and the response's command) > I understand why you did that, but it kinda goes against the principle that > (lib)lldb shouldn't tie itself to any specific user/client. > > Maybe that's okay, maybe not, but I don't feel comfortable approving on my > own. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129728 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
