labath added a comment. In D56232#1348514 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D56232#1348514>, @zturner wrote:
> Is that even necessary? If a platform is not remote aware, `IsHost()` will > always just return `true` by definition. So we could put all of this in the > existing `Platform` base class. I remember looking at this a while a go and concluding against it, but i'm not sure if it was impossible of just I didn't like the result. The issue here is that PlatformWindows and PlatformPosix already have a m_remote_platform member (which normally is an instance of PlatformRemoteGDBServer). To move the common class into the base one, we'd need to move this member too. That would mean that any platform has a "remote" member, even those that already are "remote". That sounds a bit weird. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D56232/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D56232 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
