[Lldb-commits] [lldb] [lldb] Fix variable access in old SBFrames after inferior function calls (PR #178823)

[via lldb-commits]

================
@@ -89,6 +89,7 @@
 #define LLDB_INVALID_PROCESS_ID 0
 #define LLDB_INVALID_THREAD_ID 0
 #define LLDB_INVALID_FRAME_ID UINT32_MAX
+#define LLDB_INVALID_FRAME_LIST_ID 0
----------------
jimingham wrote:

It seems weird to use 0 as the invalid frame list ID, when you use 0 explicitly as the Unwinder ID.  Is there a reason not to use UINT32_MAX?  I don't think anyone is likely to want to use that many chained frame providers...

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/178823