hintonda updated this revision to Diff 120308.
hintonda added a comment.
Reimplement at a python module.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36347
Files:
utils/clangdiag.py
Index: utils/clangdiag.py
===
--- /dev/null
+++ utils/clangdiag.p
hintonda added a comment.
Thanks for all the feedback. I'll report back once I've addressed all your
suggestions.
Thanks again...
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36347
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bi
jasonmolenda added a comment.
Sorry for missing this back in August.
I think it'd be clearer to import your python once in the startup, like
-o "script import $module" \
Multiple imports are a no-op IIUC so it's harmless to re-import the module
every time the breakpoint is hit (I'm guessing it
jingham added a comment.
I can't see anything wrong with the SB API use here. I don't feel qualified to
comment on the most effective workflow for an analysis I've never had to do,
however.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36347
___
cfe-commits mailing
clayborg added a comment.
If you want to run the script from the command line, then it is necessary. If
it is run from within LLDB it will just work. I like to have my LLDB python
scripts work both ways.
This might be better implemented as a new command that gets installed and can
be used with
zturner added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36347#902157, @clayborg wrote:
> Please do convert to python. Just know that you can use "lldb -P" to get the
> python path that is needed in order to do "import lldb" in the python script.
> So you can try doing a "import lldb", and if that
clayborg added a comment.
Please do convert to python. Just know that you can use "lldb -P" to get the
python path that is needed in order to do "import lldb" in the python script.
So you can try doing a "import lldb", and if that fails, catch the exception,
run "lldb -P", add that path to the
+jingham
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:57 AM Don Hinton via Phabricator <
revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote:
> hintonda added a comment.
>
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36347#901885, @zturner wrote:
>
> > One possible reason for why this never got any traction is that
> `lldb-commits` wasn't added as
hintonda added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D36347#901885, @zturner wrote:
> One possible reason for why this never got any traction is that
> `lldb-commits` wasn't added as a subscriber. While it's true that the tagged
> people should have chimed in, having the whole commits list wi
zturner added a subscriber: lldb-commits.
zturner added a comment.
One possible reason for why this never got any traction is that `lldb-commits`
wasn't added as a subscriber. While it's true that the tagged people should
have chimed in, having the whole commits list will get some more visibili
hintonda added a comment.
ping...
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36347
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
hintonda added a comment.
ping...
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36347
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
hintonda updated this revision to Diff 109949.
hintonda added a comment.
- Use temp files instead of temp dir.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36347
Files:
CMakeLists.txt
utils/CMakeLists.txt
utils/run_lldb.sh.in
Index: utils/run_lldb.sh.in
=
rjmccall edited reviewers, added: jasonmolenda, spyffe; removed: rjmccall.
rjmccall added a comment.
Since this is fundamentally an LLDB script, I've tagged a couple of LLDB people
to review it.
Jason, Sean: the idea here is to make it easier for clang developers to debug
unexpected diagnostics
14 matches
Mail list logo
