[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D37923: Implement interactive command interruption

[Leonard Mosescu via lldb-commits]

Yes, using line endings as split points is somewhat arbitrary, anything
that's a reasonable compromise between interruption responsiveness and low
interrupt polling overhead would do. I feel that the lines are somewhat
nicer since arbitrary splitting may lead to confusion and/or formatting
ugliness.

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Adrian McCarthy via Phabricator <
reviews at reviews.llvm.org> wrote:

> amccarth accepted this revision.
> amccarth added a comment.
>
> LGTM.
>
> But just a thought:  Is it worth doing all the work to scan for line
> endings for the interruption points?  What if, instead, it just printed the
> next _n_ characters on each iteration until the entire buffer has been
> printed.  Sure, sometimes an interruption will split a line, and sometimes
> it won't.  I'm not sure that's important for interactive usage.  It would
> mean less fiddly code, faster output (because you don't have to scan every
> character), and a zillion short lines will print as fast as a smaller
> number of longer lines that represents the same volume of text.
>
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D37923
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/attachments/20170920/5d10e84e/attachment.html>