On 18 August 2014 15:45, Todd Fiala <[email protected]> wrote: > > In sum, I'm for either > > (1) changing to either `process launch --enable-aslr <true/false>` and change > the `settings target.disable-aslr' to match the name as the fallback setting, > or > > (2) keeping the target.disable-aslr setting, and extending `process launch > --disable-aslr` to take true/false. (But - note - this does get into what > Chandler called out before as being somewhat long in the tooth - `process > launch --disable-aslr false` when you want ASLR.)
Ugh, let's avoid the double negative to enable it. Is it rare enough that we can just do without the short option as you said, and have --enable-aslr / --disable-aslr? Or if it's going to take an argument, drop the 'enable/disable' and have --aslr true / --aslr false? _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
