jimingham wrote: Would it make sense to have opt be the result of a frame-format token, which we could put in the default format (function.optimization?) and people could add or not in custom formats?
Jim > On Dec 8, 2023, at 3:59 PM, Alex Langford ***@***.***> wrote: > > > @bulbazord commented on this pull request. > > I think conceptually this makes sense, but I somewhat wonder if folks would > get confused when they have a custom frame format and don't see the [opt] in > there? The current behavior is that [opt] is always there so folks know they > don't have to put it in their custom frame format. When it's missing after > this change, I wonder if they'll notice. > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74861#pullrequestreview-1773317436>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADUPVW47YIOI3CWTY6ULIJDYIOSXTAVCNFSM6AAAAABAM4WLDCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMYTONZTGMYTONBTGY>. > You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned. > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/74861 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
