search for: move_ctor

...e have now. It's a whole lot simpler to say something like "FreeBSD implies LLDB" instead of "FreeBSD implies accelerator tables and standard TLS opcode and no pubnames or pubtypes." Or would you rather say "--lang-feature=auto --lang-feature=rvalue-ref --lang-feature=move_ctor ..." than "-std=c++11"? > IE a year from now, somebody comes along with a version of GDB that > doesn't match what your current "tuning profile" is, and asks for it > to change. If it's meaningfully different, i.e. makes enough of a functional and/or siz...

.../thread/futures/futures.promise/default.pass.cpp libc++ :: std/thread/futures/futures.promise/dtor.pass.cpp libc++ :: std/thread/futures/futures.promise/get_future.pass.cpp libc++ :: std/thread/futures/futures.promise/move_assign.pass.cpp libc++ :: std/thread/futures/futures.promise/move_ctor.pass.cpp libc++ :: std/thread/futures/futures.promise/set_exception.pass.cpp libc++ :: std/thread/futures/futures.promise/set_exception_at_thread_exit.pass.cpp libc++ :: std/thread/futures/futures.promise/set_lvalue.pass.cpp libc++ :: std/thread/futures/futures.promise/set_lvalue_at...

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:43 PM, Dimitry Andric <dimitry at andric.com> wrote: > On 7 Feb 2018, at 21:51, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers <release-testers at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> There's been a lot of merges since rc1, and hopefully the tests are in >> a better state now. >> >> 6.0.0-rc2 was just tagged, after r324506. >> >>

This is basically a reboot of the previous thread titled About the "debugger target" except that "target" was really too strong a term for what I had intended to use this feature for. "Debugger tuning" is more like it. You don't need to have read the previous thread, I'll recap here. Fundamentally, Clang/LLVM uses DWARF as the specification for the