clayborg added a comment. In D112691#3095010 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D112691#3095010>, @jingham wrote:
> Do you care about the history of these settings? After all, the problem > might arise because someone set a setting then unset it. Your statistics > approach wouldn't catch that. If you are really trying to build an > architecture where we can track this sort of problem down, then you might > need more of a history approach, where the settings and certain other changes > in the state of the debugger mark epochs, and you aggregate data into those > epochs? Personally I find most people set the important settings once and them leave them alone for the debug session. History of settings and timings could be nice, but we have no infrastructure to associate timestamps with events in the debug session right now, that being said it could be added. If we don't want this in the statistics dump I can fully understand, though I do like a one stop command people can run when they want to report issues that may involve performance or other things going wrong with the debug session. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D112691/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D112691 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
