[Lldb-commits] [lldb] Add the ability to define a Python based command that uses CommandObjectParsed (PR #70734)

[via lldb-commits]

================
@@ -0,0 +1,313 @@
+"""
+This module implements a couple of utility classes to make writing
+lldb parsed commands more Pythonic.
+The way to use it is to make a class for your command that inherits from ParsedCommandBase.
+That will make an LLDBOVParser which you will use for your
+option definition, and to fetch option values for the current invocation
+of your command.  Access to the OV parser is through:
+
+ParsedCommandBase.get_parser()
+
+Next, implement setup_command_definition() in your new command class, and call:
+
+  self.get_parser().add_option()
+
+to add all your options.  The order doesn't matter for options, lldb will sort them
+alphabetically for you when it prints help.
+
+Similarly you can define the arguments with:
+
+  self.get_parser().add_argument()
+
+At present, lldb doesn't do as much work as it should verifying arguments, it
+only checks that commands that take no arguments don't get passed arguments.
+
+Then implement the execute function for your command as:
+
+    def __call__(self, debugger, args_list, exe_ctx, result):
+
+The arguments will be a list of strings.  
+
+You can access the option values using the 'dest' string you passed in when defining the option.
+
+If you need to know whether a given option was set by the user or not, you can
+use the was_set API.
+
+There are example commands in the lldb testsuite at:
+
+llvm-project/lldb/test/API/commands/command/script/add/test_commands.py
+"""
+import inspect
+import lldb
+import sys
+from abc import abstractmethod
+
+class LLDBOVParser:
----------------
jimingham wrote:

Yes, I agree, nobody will ever type this one because that's not even the class you override.  So there's no reason for it to have a mysterious name.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/70734