jarin added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/tools/lldb-server/registers-target-xml-reading/TestGdbRemoteTargetXmlPacket.py:69 + self.assertEqual(q_info_reg["offset"], xml_info_reg.get("offset")) + self.assertEqual(q_info_reg["encoding"], xml_info_reg.get("encoding")) ---------------- Why don't you test all the fields here? ================ Comment at: lldb/source/Plugins/Process/gdb-remote/GDBRemoteCommunicationServerLLGS.cpp:2814 + if (!encoding.empty()) + response.Printf("encoding=\"%s\" ", encoding.str().c_str()); + ---------------- labath wrote: > Similarly, `response << "encoding='" << encoding << "' "`, or > `response.Format("encoding='{0}'", encoding)` would be shorter, and avoid > string copying. Nit: Now it is a funny mixture of operator<<, Printfs and PutCString. Is there a reason not to use << for everything? (I guess PutHex8 can't be easily done with <<, but everything else can?) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D74217/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D74217 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits