xiaobai added a comment. In D64964#1592851 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64964#1592851>, @JDevlieghere wrote:
> All uses of this new function drop the error on the ground. Does that mean it > doesn't matter? If it does, should we return an expected instead? Should we > stop on the first error, or is it fine to overwrite when iterating over > `languages_for_expressions`? It seems like the error handling needs some more > work here. If you at the actual function `GetScratchTypeSystemForLanguage`, the error is completely unused. I think dropping the Status returning an llvm::Expected is probably the right thing to do. In that case, I don't think we should stop if `GetScratchTypeSystemForLanguage` returns a None value. I'll update this tomorrow. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64964/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64964 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
