labath added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34945#798808, @ravitheja wrote:
> With this patch, I see the extra packet to query from server is probably > unnecessary. I mean the error code is still there and it should be sufficient > for the client to detect an error. As long as it does not mistake it for > something else it should not be a problem ? . Well, if we don't care about newer lldb-server being able to communicate with older clients than it's theoretically superfluous. I'm not sure whether we care about this scenario, but I was kinda expecting we do it this way, because that's how it's done elsewhere (e.g. QListThreadsInStopReply). Let's see if others have anything to say about this (might take a bit of time as it's holiday in the US now). ================ Comment at: docs/lldb-gdb-remote.txt:137 +// +// E<error code>;"Error Message" +// ---------------- The quotes here are misleading -- after reading this I would expect that the string is sent quoted. Best be explicit about the encoding of the error string. ================ Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteCommunicationServer.h:64 + PacketResult SendErrorResponse(Status &error); + ---------------- ravitheja wrote: > labath wrote: > > Why the reference? > how about const reference ? much better https://reviews.llvm.org/D34945 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
