[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D37651: Fix for bug 34532 - A few rough corners related to post-mortem debugging (core/minidump)

[Zachary Turner via lldb-commits]

Note that if something originates from user input, then i agree there's no
excuse for a fail fast. But after all the inputs have been sanitized, I
think it's fine to fast fail
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 7:12 PM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 6:11 PM Jim Ingham via Phabricator <
> reviews at reviews.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> I know there is debate about this one side and another but for lldb this
>> is a settled issue.  Unless you really are in a state where the world is
>> about to come crashing down around you, you can't raise a fatal error in
>> lldb.  And in this case, the world is only very minorly strange, so it is
>> certainly not appropriate.
>
>
> I don't agree that this is a settled issue in LLDB.
>
> For starters, clang already does this, and LLDB links against libclang.
>
> Second, a year or so ago, i recall Greg saying that LLDB now runs out of
> process in Xcode, which should make this a non issue.
>
> Finally, by allowing inconsistent state to propagate through the code you
> are only hurting yourself, as you're ultimately not preventing any
> crashes.  It'll just crash later when you de reference a null pointer or
> read some corrupt memory.  Furthermore, it actually increases the
> likelihood of introducing bugs, due to the added complexity and technical
> debt introduced by untested code paths
>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/attachments/20170909/01d40927/attachment.html>