clayborg added a comment. At the object file level I would love to see much less of this specific unwind info making it into the ObjectFile interface. Why can't we just ask the ObjectFile to provide an UnwindPlan for a given address. There is so much complexity within the UnwindPlan where it is managing all these specific unwind plans. IMHO we should just ask the ObjectFile for an UnwindPlan and let the ObjectFile decide which one is best. Right now UnwindPlan manages a ton of different kinds of unwind alternatives and UnwindPlan has all sorts of knowledge about each specific unwind plan type (ARM compact unwind, Apple compact unwind, EH frame, .debug_frame, arch default, and more). We seem to be adding to this complexity here by making all ObjectFile instances having to know how to create each different type when UnwindPlan already has the all the abstraction we need in UnwindPlan::Row.
Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67347/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67347 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
