Am obviously brand new to your process and a bit of an old dog when it comes to 
learning new tricks.  Would you prefer I make a new submission with the 
-U999999 diff?   Also, am more than willing to help with the Java tests if that 
would be useful.

________________________________
From: Raphael Isemann via Phabricator <revi...@reviews.llvm.org>
Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 10:46:50 AM
To: David Millar; anoro...@apple.com; fallk...@yahoo.com; kkle...@redhat.com; 
medismail.benn...@gmail.com; jo...@devlieghere.com; tedw...@quicinc.com; 
jmole...@apple.com; syaghm...@apple.com; jing...@apple.com; v...@apple.com; 
boris.ulasev...@gmail.com; lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org; h.imai....@nitech.jp; 
bruce.mitche...@gmail.com; david.spick...@linaro.org; 
quic_soura...@quicinc.com; djordje.todoro...@syrmia.com; 
serhiy.re...@gmail.com; liburd1...@outlook.com
Cc: mgo...@gentoo.org
Subject: [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting 
Bridge

teemperor added a comment.

In D111409#3051110 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409#3051110>, @d-millar wrote:

> Apologies for the inclusion of that last file "patch" - that is the "git diff 
> -U9999999" result, should that be useful.

You can just upload that diff file and Phabricator will display it properly. 
There is no need to include the raw diff as part of the patch itself (it just 
makes this diff 100 times larger than it needs to be) :)

Anyway, I think this seems like a reasonable thing to have. We have to figure 
out though how we can properly set up some Java tests for this and it would be 
nice if we also find a bot that could actually run the tests for us.



================
Comment at: lldb/bindings/java/CMakeLists.txt:3
+ * IP: Apache License 2.0 with LLVM Exceptions
+ */
+add_custom_command(
----------------
I don't think CMake accepts this as a comment and I think we anyway don't put 
license headers in CMake scripts.


================
Comment at: lldb/source/API/CMakeLists.txt:84
   SBTrace.cpp
+  SBTraceOptions.cpp
   SBType.cpp
----------------
I think this is some conflict with one of the SBTrace patches.


Repository:
  rLLDB LLDB

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409

_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to