labath added a comment.
In D55038#1314026 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55038#1314026>, @JDevlieghere
wrote:
> Test didn't run. Is there a way to REQUIRE either darwin or linux?
I think the canonical way to do that would be to define a new feature in lit,
which gets set when the target supports remote debugging and then use that
feature in the REQUIRES directive.
================
Comment at: source/Utility/Reproducer.cpp:41-42
+Reproducer::Reproducer(ReproducerMode mode, llvm::Optional<FileSpec> root) {
+ // It's unfortunate that we have to do so much I/O here that can fail. The
+ // best we can do is not initialize the reproducer.
+ switch (mode) {
----------------
JDevlieghere wrote:
> labath wrote:
> > It should be possible to bubble this all the way up to the
> > `SBDebugger::Initialize` call. Is there a reason to not do that?
> Do you mean having the private Initialize function return an error (and an
> SBError for the SB variant)?
Yes, that's what I meant. Up until now, our initialization functions were
mostly just hooking up various pointers, which are things that can't
(shouldn't) fail, but if now a simple typo in the reproducer path can cause the
initialization to fail, then I think it would be good to report that.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55038/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55038
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
