[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D158010: [lldb] Allow synthetic providers in C++ and fix linking problems

walter erquinigo via Phabricator via lldb-commits lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org
Tue Aug 22 09:30:14 PDT 2023

wallace added inline comments.

Comment at: lldb/source/Commands/CommandObjectType.cpp:2174
electriclilies wrote:
> jingham wrote:
> > electriclilies wrote:
> > > rriddle wrote:
> > > > Why is this dropped?
> > > Walter and I want to use the synthetic types from C++, but right now it's only supported in Python. The motivation behind this is to make it so that we can actually use the synthetic types. 
> > Just to be clear.  There are already lots of synthetic child providers implemented in C++ in in lldb already (look for CXXSyntheticChildren constructors in CPlusPlusLanguage.cpp for instance).  
> > 
> > I think what you are saying is that you are removing the restriction that you have to BUILD lldb with Python in order to add C++ implemented summaries.  If that's indeed what you are saying, then this is fine, since that seems an odd restriction...
> > 
> > But it would be nice to have some kind of testing that this actually works, since I don't think any of our bots build lldb w/o Python.
> Yes that's exactly it! I agree it would be nice to have a test for it but I don't know how to add it. 
@jingham , indeed, we couldn't add buildbot tests for this they all build with python support.

However, a good compromise is to enable all these commands except for the `add` ones, because they have the option to use python-defined extensions. `clear`, `delete`, `info` and `list` should be fine even without python scripting support.

What do you think?

  rG LLVM Github Monorepo



More information about the lldb-commits mailing list