> On Aug 11, 2014, at 2:44 PM, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well, ideally we should strive to have any system calls get moved into the > Host layer anyway, and so that problem would solve itself by by just getting > rid of checks to LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX. So maybe I'll revisit this question > after I can get rid of more of these uses of LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX and put more > stuff into Host layer.
We didn't have the time to come up with a complete host layer when we started working on lldb; we needed to get something up and working and other abstractions were more important than that. So a bunch of unix'y assumptions crept in all over the place. Cleaning that up seems the right way to address this! Thanks... Jim > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > From a quick survey it seems as if most of the uses of LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX are > for turning off POSIX specific features, not turning on Windows specific > ones. LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX seems more appropriate for this that !_WIN32 or > whatever. For instance, if we wanted to port lldb to OpenVMS, we could just > keep the defines as they were and add LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX to the OpenVMS > makefile (though I'm sure it has a POSIX layer of some level of fidelity, but > using that or the native VMS calls would be up to the person who was doing > the port...) > > It does seem like we are using POSIX to mean UNIX, so that some UNIX'es that > aren't fully POSIX compliant succeed the checks, and then need #ifdef FREEBSD > or whatever. Not sure it's worth cleaning this up, however. > > Jim > > > > On Aug 8, 2014, at 5:43 PM, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Frequently I see checks against LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX, and other times i see > > specific OS checks. It seems to me like #if LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX is > > equivalent to #if defined(_WIN32). If this is correct, any objection to me > > marking LLDB_DISABLE_POSIX as deprecated and slowly changing conditionals > > over to #if defined(_WIN32) instead? It's easier for me to reason about > > and I don't have to spend time thinking about what other platforms might be > > affected that way. > > _______________________________________________ > > lldb-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev > > _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
