[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D32930: New framework for lldb client-server communication tests.

labath added a comment. The largest issue I see here is the use of exceptions, which are banned in llvm. We'll need to get rid of those before we start discussing anything else. This means we'll need to propagate errors manually, and we should design it in a way that it is easy to ASSERT on the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D32930: New framework for lldb client-server communication tests.

krytarowski added a comment. GoogleTest is an already a part of LLVM. It is stripped down version of this software with patches for LLVM - at least with included NetBSD support that is still pending upstream. https://reviews.llvm.org/D32930 ___ ll

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D32930: New framework for lldb client-server communication tests.

krytarowski added inline comments. Comment at: unittests/tools/lldb-server/inferior/thread_inferior.cpp:21 + + asm volatile ("int3"); + delay = false; int3 is specific to x86. Some instructions to emit software breakpoint in other architectures: https://github

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D32930: New framework for lldb client-server communication tests.

Take a look at ErrorChecking.h in llvm, it contains some useful macros for using expected and error On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 5:42 AM Kamil Rytarowski via Phabricator via lldb-commits wrote: > krytarowski added inline comments. > > > > Comment at: unittests/tools/lldb-server/inferio

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D32930: New framework for lldb client-server communication tests.

takuto.ikuta added inline comments. Comment at: unittests/CMakeLists.txt:57 add_subdirectory(Breakpoint) +add_subdirectory(tools) add_subdirectory(Core) better to sort alphabetically? Using tools instead of Tools intentionally? Comment at: un

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D32930: New framework for lldb client-server communication tests.

tberghammer added a comment. I few high level comments after a quick read through. Comment at: unittests/tools/lldb-server/.gitignore:1 +thread_inferior Why do we need this? I would expect cmake to *not* put anything into my source directory when doing an out-

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D32823: Remove an expensive lock from Timer

scott.smith added a comment. Can someone please commit this? Thank you! Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D32823 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D32930: New framework for lldb client-server communication tests.

zturner added inline comments. Comment at: unittests/tools/lldb-server/inferior/thread_inferior.cpp:21 + + asm volatile ("int3"); + delay = false; tberghammer wrote: > krytarowski wrote: > > int3 is specific to x86. > > > > Some instructions to emit software b

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D25886: [Test Suite] Properly respect --framework option

beanz added inline comments. Comment at: lldb/trunk/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/lldbtest.py:1418 "include")), -'LD_EXTRAS': "-L%s -llldb" % lib_dir} +'LD_EXTRAS': "-L%s/../lib -llldb -Wl,-rpa

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D32597: Initiate loading of shared libraries in parallel

labath added a comment. I'm out of office this week. Could you hold until I get back? Hopefully we will see some development on the llvm/lld front in the meanwhile. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D32597 ___ lldb-commits mailing li