JDevlieghere added a comment.
Thanks for adding this, Jim. This is one of those things that comes up one in a
while when it confuses our users. It's great we'll be able to help them adopt
this.
================
Comment at: lldb/bindings/python/python-wrapper.swig:1031-1048
+ // First call the target initializer:
+ if (target) {
+ python_function_name_string += ".__lldb_init_module_with_target";
+ python_function_name = python_function_name_string.c_str();
+
+ auto pfunc = PythonObject::ResolveNameWithDictionary<PythonCallable>(
+ python_function_name, dict);
----------------
I'm surprised we might call both. The way I expected this to work is that if
`__lldb_init_module_with_target` is defined, that's what we use if wee have a
target and otherwise fall back to `__lldb_init_module` assuming it's defined.
What's the benefit of calling both? Do you expect the implementation to be
different? Or do you think it's more likely that the implementations will be
similar, just one having access to the target?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D146152/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D146152
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
