jingham added a comment. In D58838#1415646 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838#1415646>, @aprantl wrote:
> In D58838#1415637 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838#1415637>, @zturner wrote: > > > Yea it would be nice if we could remove all of the `LLDB_CONFIGURATION_xxx` > > macros and just use either the LLVM ones or standard ones such as NDEBUG > > > I generally agree with this, but we need to decide what to do on a > case-by-case basis. So far I found four categories of LLDB_CONFIGURATION_DEBUG > > 1. assertions that should just be "assert" > 2. expensive checks that should be guarded by LLVM_ENABLE_EXPENSIVE_CHECKS > instead > 3. Consistency checks that assume that the debug info is 100% > accurate/complete and that may fail in the real world > 4. additional logging > > there may be other cases that I haven't found yet. Additional logging should really go through the Verbose version of whatever log channel is appropriate. The additional code won't get run in the normal logging case, so there's no reason to throw it away. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D58838 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
