================
@@ -621,63 +621,72 @@ void Thread::WillStop() {
}
bool Thread::SetupToStepOverBreakpointIfNeeded(RunDirection direction) {
- if (GetResumeState() != eStateSuspended) {
- // First check whether this thread is going to "actually" resume at all.
- // For instance, if we're stepping from one level to the next of an
- // virtual inlined call stack, we just change the inlined call stack index
- // without actually running this thread. In that case, for this thread we
- // shouldn't push a step over breakpoint plan or do that work.
- if (GetCurrentPlan()->IsVirtualStep())
- return false;
+ if (GetResumeState() == eStateSuspended)
----------------
dlav-sc wrote:
I refactored this part as well because I plan to implement the logic for adding
a `WatchpointThreadPlan` to the thread plan stack within this function. As I
mentioned above, the logic for software watchpoints is planned to be
implemented using a special `ThreadPlan`.
Essentially, the entire refactoring of this function boils down to adding a
couple of early return statements. Personally, I strongly dislike cascades of
nested `if/else` blocks. I understand that several years ago it was apparently
fashionable to write functions with a single `return` statement, so I'm lenient
towards that practice. However, early returns are much easier to read, and
since I'm about to add new logic to this function anyway, I figured why not
tidy it up first.
Although, if you think it's better to implement this part together with the
logic for adding the thread plan, I wouldn't be opposed. We can leave this for
the next patch.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/159807
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
