JDevlieghere added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lldb/bindings/interface/SBAddressDocstrings.i:1-2
+%feature("docstring",
+"A section + offset based address class.
+
----------------
bulbazord wrote:
> mib wrote:
> > kastiglione wrote:
> > > How much of these header docs are specific to the API, but not specific
> > > to Swig bindings? Should/can we move these to the SB headers and have
> > > Swig make use of those? In other words, can/should files like
> > > `SBAddressDocstrings.I` contain only docs that are specific to bindings?
> > IIUC, @bulbazord feel free to correct me on this, most doc will be generate
> > from doxygen in the header file and only things that are specific to the
> > bindings will be in the interface.
> What Ismail is saying is what I'd like us to move to. Some of the docstrings
> are not specific to python at all and can be moved to the header files and
> generated from doxygen. I think that would best be done in a follow-up change
> in order to make this one more manageable as there is quite a lot to change
> already.
+1 for breaking this up into separate patches. Does SWIG automatically pick up
Doxygen comments? That seems like a good thing to do regardless, so maybe
something we can do while we're ironing out some of the other details in this
review.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D142926/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D142926
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
