The idea of having a static function in SBDebugger that returns lldb configuration information seems good to me.
Having the API return an SBStructuredData with the full configuration information seems like a pretty future-proof way to do this. I can't see that this data will get sufficiently large that consing up the whole set of config options to answer a single question is going to be a problem, and the info is constant for the run of lldb, so you can cache the result. Jim > On Feb 5, 2018, at 4:01 AM, Pavel Labath via lldb-dev > <lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hello all, > > In <https://reviews.llvm.org/D42145> we have a feature that only works > when lldb was built with xml support. To test this, we need the test > to know whether we were build with xml support. > > The typical llvm solution would be to generate some dotest equivalent > of lit.site.cfg at build time, which we could then load from the test > and query for build settings. > > However, it has occurred to me that the information about various > build properties (xml suport, libedit support, list of llvm targets we > support) is something that could be useful to other liblldb clients as > well. So, another way of exposing this would be to have a function > (maybe a static function on SBDebugger ?) that the test can call and > get the required information that way. > > Do you have any thoughts on how this should be handled? Or maybe know > of an existing way that we could check this information already? > > regards, > pavel > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev