wallace added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Target/TraceHTR.cpp:160
+ current_instruction_load_address);
+ valid_cursor = cursor.Next();
+ if (current_instruction_type &
----------------
jj10306 wrote:
> wallace wrote:
> > valid_cursor is not a nice name, just call it no_more_data, end_of_trace,
> > or something like that
> I was trying to use "positive logic", otherwise using something like
> `end_of_trace` would require and negating every use of it and every time the
> `Next()` is called (i.e `end_of_trace =!cursor->Next()`).
>
> This is obviously a very minor thing, but I think using a well named
> "positive logic" variable makes the code easier to read - thoughts on using a
> name like `more_data_in_trace`? It's definitely harder to come up with a well
> named positive logic variable so let me know if you have any better
> suggestions
>
more_data_in_trace is fine!
================
Comment at: lldb/source/Target/TraceHTR.cpp:245
+ os.flush();
+ if (os.has_error()) {
+ s.Printf("error exporting trace representation to %s\n", outfile_cstr);
----------------
jj10306 wrote:
> wallace wrote:
> > can you also show the actual error message from os?
> I don't believe `llvm::raw_fd_ostream` stores the error message, only the
> error code.
you can invoke os.error() and then convert that value to a string :)
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D105741/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D105741
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
