labath added a comment. In D91216#2387956 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D91216#2387956>, @mgorny wrote:
> In D91216#2387909 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D91216#2387909>, @labath wrote: > >> Regarding the asserts, I'm thinking if it wouldn't be better to check the >> compare the resulting RegisterInfo structs instead of the raw struct layout. >> The reasons for that are: >> >> - it will be checking the thing that we're actually relying on (the register >> info macros is pretty complex and can be messed up easily >> - the register info artifacts (unlike the GPR structs) are exported from >> these files, so the checks for that could be placed into a unit test >> >> What do you think? > > I presume you mean verifying that `byte_offset`s and `byte_size`s are written > correctly to the struct? Yes, exactly. > I like the idea that static asserts are going to blow up during compilation > already but I suppose it's not very important as I don't expect these > structures to change. That's true, but I've found that the inclusion of system headers (with all their acoompanying ifdefs) looks pretty bad... CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D91216/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D91216 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
