kwk marked an inline comment as done. kwk added a comment. In D74136#1889066 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D74136#1889066>, @labath wrote:
> Yes, I believe this matches the behavior we were talking about. > > I could make a bunch of comments on the implementation and the test, but I'm > not sure if we're at that stage yet... I'd be happy to hear about your comments @labath because I'm kind of stuck in what I can think of. I will obviously rename `SearchFilterByModuleListAndCU` but that can come in a child revision. ================ Comment at: lldb/source/Core/SearchFilter.cpp:712 + // the list of CU's or support files, that's enough. + // TODO(kwk): Is that enough? + ---------------- labath wrote: > I'm not sure -- it'd be good to check that we still honor the module (aka > --shlib) restriction. @labath How do you want to honor it? I guess `ModulePasses(fileSpec)` as a check is wrong, isn't it? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D74136/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D74136 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
