scott.smith added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757#743796, @zturner wrote:
> s/instead of LLVM/instead of LLDB/ I hear you, but IMO it's not ready for that yet. 1. It would depend on ThreadPool, but 2. LLDB hasn't switched to ThreadPool yet, because 3. I want to figure out how to incorporate tasks enqueuing tasks first. I don't want to commit a monolithic patch with all my changes (and I haven't developed them all yet), so instead I submit incremental improvements. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D32757 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
