https://github.com/JDevlieghere commented:
The patch itself looks good with some nits, but I'm (still) on the fence whether this a good idea. In the past, a similar question has come up in the context of logging and whether we want to add SB APIs to make use of LLDB's internals. The argument in favor is that LLDB is meant to be extensible and that those extension points should be able to benefit from LLDB's infrastructure. The counter-argument is that nothing can prevent users from reporting arbitrary data and making it look like it originates from LLDB. I'm curious to hear other's opinion on the matter. If it wasn't the SB API I think we could figure that out in the PR as we have more freedom to change our mind in the future, but given the stability guarantees for the SB API, this might be worth an RFC before we commit to something. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/119052 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
