JDevlieghere wrote: > Is it possible to do the launching and attaching in asynchronous mode so that > the stop events are always emitted?
Yes, that's the alternative I mentioned the PR description: > An alternative approach could be to stop trying to hide the initial stop > event, and instead report it to the client unconditionally. Instead of > ignoring the stop for the asynchronous case, we could send a stop event after > we're done handling the synchronous case. Thought I need to confirm that this would be compliant with the spec. I also think that from a user experience point of view, you probably don't want to see the stop (similar to how LLDB doesn't promote every private stop to a public stop). When attaching, we always stop. For launching, we hide the initial stop unless you requested stop-at-entry. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/137920 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
