[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D33035: Tool for using Intel(R) Processor Trace hardware feature

[Pavel Labath via Phabricator via lldb-commits]

labath added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33035#798925, @abhishek.aggarwal wrote:

> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33035#798885, @labath wrote:
>
> > Hm... that's a bit of a drag. I guess the SB API never ran into this problem because it always provides it's own vector-like classes (SBModuleList, SBFileSpecList, etc.). I guess the most canonical way would be to follow that example and have your own class for a list of instructions. However, that is a bit annoying, so I do see a case for making code generated by swig as an exception to the rule.
>
>
> Hmm .. Is the decision about enabling exception handling only for swig generated code lie in LLDB's community's hands or we will have to ask LLVM community for this too? I can add another class to resolve this problem but I am not sure whether it is the right way to go.


I think we can start with an email to lldb-dev and see how it goes. Nobody on the llvm side uses swig.

I'm not sure what would be a better solution either... I don't like either of them :)


https://reviews.llvm.org/D33035