You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
My initial naive implementation was to have three generated ranges:
one for the whole program
one going from beforeF to afterF, pointing to fn's original scope
one going from beforeI to afterI, pointing to inlineMe's original scope
However, with those generated ranges, when placing a breakpoint right before the otherFn(param) call you would see the value for param as 4 rather than 1.
I think the correct generated ranges are either:
one for the whole program
one going from beforeF to afterF, pointing to fn's original scope
one going from beforeI to afterI, pointing to inlineMe's original scope
one covering 4 * otherFn(param), pointing to fn's original scope
or:
one for the whole program
one going from beforeF to afterF, pointing to fn's original scope
one going from beforeI to right before 4 * otherFn(param), pointing to inlineMe's original scope
one going from + 3 to afterI, pointing to inlineMe's original scope
And I also think that the first one is slightly better since it better represents the stack trace when paused at that breakpoint.
Am I interpreting this correctly?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Consider this example:
That is compiled to
My initial naive implementation was to have three generated ranges:
beforeF
toafterF
, pointing tofn
's original scopebeforeI
toafterI
, pointing toinlineMe
's original scopeHowever, with those generated ranges, when placing a breakpoint right before the
otherFn(param)
call you would see the value forparam
as4
rather than1
.I think the correct generated ranges are either:
beforeF
toafterF
, pointing tofn
's original scopebeforeI
toafterI
, pointing toinlineMe
's original scope4 * otherFn(param)
, pointing tofn
's original scopeor:
beforeF
toafterF
, pointing tofn
's original scopebeforeI
to right before4 * otherFn(param)
, pointing toinlineMe
's original scope+ 3
toafterI
, pointing toinlineMe
's original scopeAnd I also think that the first one is slightly better since it better represents the stack trace when paused at that breakpoint.
Am I interpreting this correctly?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: