[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] Add SBArgs to the public interface

[jingham at apple.com]

I agree with Greg that we should not add API to the SB API's unless there is an external programmer need for it.  Adding API just for testing purposes seems like a bad idea to me.  It will just end up making the API fat & hard to understand.

OTOH, I wonder if it would be interesting to have an SBCommandInterpreter::HandleCommand that takes an SBArg instead of a command string.  If you were trying to program HandleCommand, it might be nice not to have to cons up the string that protects all the quotes just so lldb will then take it apart again correctly.  In that case, it might be nice to have a way to just build up the args by hand.

Jim



> On Mar 11, 2015, at 2:52 PM, Greg Clayton <clayborg at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I would rather not add API if it is just used for testing and I would prefer to not have this in our public API if we don't need it.
> 
> Don't we have some internal based testing beneath the public API walls we can use?
> 
> The other way to test if the argument parsing is working is to have a program that dumps arguments and launch this process and verify the arguments by parsing the stdout of the program. I believe we have some tests that do this that were made to test this very thing.
> 
> 
> http://reviews.llvm.org/D8265
> 
> EMAIL PREFERENCES
>  http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-commits mailing list
> lldb-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits