[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D26190: [RFC] Solve linking inconsistency, proposal two

[Mehdi AMINI via lldb-commits]

mehdi_amini added a comment.

OK!

How is it different from the other proposal? In the other proposal, using a LLVM class in the API boundary would break the same way under the same conditions, or did I miss something?

Something that isn't clear to me with this proposal, is how a user supposed to include its own copy of LLVM? Let say I write a client code that link to libLLVM.so and libLLDB.so?


https://reviews.llvm.org/D26190