[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24591: [LIT] First pass of LLDB LIT support

Zachary Turner via lldb-commits lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org
Wed Sep 14 16:43:25 PDT 2016

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 4:39 PM Jim Ingham <jingham at apple.com> wrote:

> > 4. You can test a LOT more things when you are able to use an api that
> doesn't have to be stable.
> When I mentioned that API, I had in mind an internal Python module that
> you could use to grub into internals.  I'm all for that.  I'm not so much
> in favor of "I have an ad hoc command that prints out various bits of
> texts, and we'll use that for testing."

Is it any different though? Take the API you're imagining to grub for
internals.  Now imagine the EXACT same API as an lldb command.  What's the
difference?  What could you do with the Python API that you couldn't do
with the command API?  Aside from write imperative control flow constructs,
which I see as a positive rather than a negative.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/attachments/20160914/6b17251a/attachment.html>

More information about the lldb-commits mailing list