probinson added a comment. In D91734#2482318 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D91734#2482318>, @dblaikie wrote:
> But, yes, we could possibly do better with more strategic is_stmt, but that's > a big/complex piece of work to tackle. Oh, absolutely. Didn't mean to imply otherwise. And the behavior now is at least easily explainable in terms of source line. Thanks for the review, this has been an irritant for our licensees since forever. And especially thanks @rnk for the flush-on-every-instruction suggestion. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D91734/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D91734 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
