bulbazord added a comment.
Seems okay to me, but it's a little messy that we're having to manage
breakpoints like this.
================
Comment at: lldb/bindings/interface/SBTargetExtensions.i:144-171
+ class watchpoints_access(object):
+ '''A helper object that will lazily hand out watchpoints for a
target when supplied an index.'''
+ def __init__(self, sbtarget):
+ self.sbtarget = sbtarget
+
+ def __len__(self):
+ if self.sbtarget:
----------------
Are these used at all?
================
Comment at:
lldb/test/API/functionalities/interactive_scripted_process/interactive_scripted_process.py:269-278
+ bkpt_file = lldb.SBFileSpec(tf.name)
+ error = self.driving_target.BreakpointsWriteToFile(bkpt_file)
+ if error.Fail():
+ log("Failed to save breakpoints from driving target (%s)"
+ % error.GetCString())
+ bkpts_list = lldb.SBBreakpointList(self.target)
+ error = self.target.BreakpointsCreateFromFile(bkpt_file,
bkpts_list)
----------------
It's interesting that we dump to a file. It'd be cool if we could dump it to a
StructuredData or something instead of a file.
================
Comment at:
lldb/test/API/functionalities/interactive_scripted_process/interactive_scripted_process.py:282
+ if error.Success():
+ self.driving_target.DeleteAllBreakpoints()
+ for bkpt in self.target.breakpoints:
----------------
Why do we delete all of the breakpoints just to re-set them afterwards? Is
there a difference between what we set and what was there before?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148548/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148548
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
