Michael137 wrote:
> Looks like LLDB linux buildbot isn't happy, checking...
Fix in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73707
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73626
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
Michael137 wrote:
Looks like LLDB linux buildbot isn't happy, checking...
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73626
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Michael137 closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73626
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Michael137 wrote:
> > I do wonder how feasible it would be for the downstream tests to be
> > adjusted to look at the `DW_AT_location`..
>
> As I mentioned on the other thread, the point is not to have to read the
> value from the process-under-debug. This is not efficient in a
>
pogo59 wrote:
> I do wonder how feasible it would be for the downstream tests to be adjusted
> to look at the `DW_AT_location`..
As I mentioned on the other thread, the point is not to have to read the value
from the process-under-debug. This is not efficient in a remote-debugging
scenario.
Michael137 wrote:
I do wonder how feasible it would be for the downstream tests to be adjusted to
look at the `DW_AT_location`..
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73626
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/jryans approved this pull request.
Thanks, seems like a fine temporary measure to me!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73626
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/Michael137 edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73626
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-codegen
@llvm/pr-subscribers-debuginfo
Author: Michael Buch (Michael137)
Changes
In #71780 we started emitting definitions for all static data-members
with constant initialisers, even if they were constants (i.e.,
Michael137 wrote:
FYI @petrhosek
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73626
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/Michael137 created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/73626
In #71780 we started emitting definitions for all static data-members with
constant initialisers, even if they were constants (i.e., didn't have a
location). We also dropped the DW_AT_const_value from the
11 matches
Mail list logo
