On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:34 AM Jim Ingham <jing...@apple.com> wrote:
> > > On Sep 19, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:27 AM Jim Ingham <jing...@apple.com> wrote: > > We agreed to forwards compatibility because people write big scripts > that use the SB API, implement GUI's on top of them (more than just Xcode) > etc. So we try not to jerk those folks around. That adds a little more > responsibility on our part to think carefully about what we add, but the > notion that we should refrain from making useful functionality available > because we'd rather not be beholden to our decisions seems really > wrong-headed to me. > > > > And in this case there's a clear use for this. For instance the xnu > macros have a bunch of Python based commands that spew out pages and pages > of output. Those guys would love to make their commands interruptible. To > do that they would need to call WasInterrupted. So this is 100% something > that should be available at the SB API layer. > > > > > > Couldn't it just return eCommandFinishedNoResult? Or a new value, > eCommandFinishedPartialResult? > > I don't follow. How would it know the user asked it to stop? > > The user already has a way to interrupt a command via DispatchInputInterrupt. If the command is then interrupted and output is lost as a result, the private api returns the appropriate value, which the user can check for.
_______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
