[lldb-dev] Is it ok to use lldb_private from the driver?

[Jim Ingham via lldb-dev]

The driver used to have a bunch of lldb_private stuff in it, mostly to run the event loop, which Greg abstracted into SB API’s a while ago.  If it can be avoided, I’d rather not add it back in.  Our claim is folks should be able to write their own debugger interfaces (command line or gui) using the SB API’s, so it would be good if we stuck to that discipline as well.

I thought that the lldm-mi was pure SB API’s.  That seemed a virtue to me.

Jim

> On Mar 18, 2016, at 9:54 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> I notice everything uses SB classes only.  Is this a hard requirement?  We have a bit of cruft in all of the top-level executables (lldb-server, lldb-mi, lldb) that could be shared if we could move it into Host, but then the 3 drivers would have to #include "lldb/Host/Host.h".  Note that lldb-mi and lldb-server already do this, it's only lldb that doesn't.  Is this ok?
> 
> If not, I can always add a method to SBHostOS and just not add a corresponding swig interface definition for it (so it wouldn't be accessible from Python), which would achieve basically the same effect.
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev