labath marked 2 inline comments as done.
labath added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/lldb/Core/RangeMap.h:636
-template <typename B, typename S, typename T, unsigned N> class RangeDataArray
{
+template <typename B, typename S, typename T, unsigned N>
+class RangeDataVector {
----------------
tberghammer wrote:
> Would it make sense to have a default value of 0 for N so people don't have
> to specify it explicitly?
I don't have an clear opinion on that. On one hand, 0 seems like a perfectly
reasonable default, but on the other SmallVector doesn't have a default either.
Everyone typedefs these anyway, so it doesn't really matter.
================
Comment at: source/Plugins/Process/elf-core/ProcessElfCore.h:140
+ typedef lldb_private::RangeDataVector<lldb::addr_t, lldb::addr_t, FileRange,
+ 0>
VMRangeToFileOffset;
----------------
tberghammer wrote:
> Should this be 1 to keep the previous semantics?
If we wanted to be strict then yes, but it seemed weird to have different sizes
for the two VMRange maps, when both of them will (hopefully) hold the same
number of entries. My guess is that the author here meant "the smallest number
possible" and didn't realize that 0 is valid too (or maybe it wasn't valid at
that time).
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D56170/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D56170
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
