[lldb-dev] Command Objects and code re-use

[Zachary Turner]

On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:49 PM, <jingham at apple.com> wrote:

>
> > On Feb 23, 2015, at 11:43 AM, Bruce Mitchener <bruce.mitchener at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Something that has come up now in a couple of contexts is the re-use of
> the command objects.
> >
> > I'm working on an alternate user interface which has a richer form of
> output than the current CLI. I'm not able to use some of the existing
> commands due to this.  The same is true of someone who might want to do an
> alternate command system with a WinDbg style approach.
> >
> > I guess I have a couple of questions:
> >
> >       • Is there something that we can do to improve code re-use at this
> level? Are there requirements for code-level compatibility here?
>
> We aren't guaranteeing anything about lldb_private API's, if that's what
> you mean.  OTOH, changing the behaviors of commands in the lldb command
> language set should be done judiciously if at all.
>
> FWIW I have some interest in the very long term in providing an
alternative command language.  I say "alternative language" because I'm
thinking of something more involved than just adding a few extra commands,
or changing some options.  I haven't nailed it down too concretely, so take
anything I say here with a grain of salt, but it would involve being able
to switch languages on the fly with a setting.

When we talk about "a richer form of output" are we talking about only the
output?  Because later you mention having a tree-like structure of
commands, so it sounds like you might also be talking about a different
command syntax or structure as well.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20150223/2f395d90/attachment.html>