vogelsgesang wrote:
> Don't use "${command:pickProcess}" at all. We need to bypass the regular
> command logic. You could use a wildcard like ${pickProcess}.
Why would we not use `${command:pickProcess}`? Why bypass the regular command
logic? We can already determine the `lldb-dap` path inside the command (also
see https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128943#discussion_r1976269198)
> [...] you programmatically invoke lldb-dap (you know its path at this point),
> and then invoke it with a new flag `--list-processes` that will just dump the
> list of processes in JSON format to stdout.
Note that we would also need to pass through parameters like
`gdb-remote-hostname` and `gdb-remote-port` such that the `--list-processes`
would reach out to the right gdb/lldbserver.
All in all, this sounds like a good long-term direction to me.
> However, this would delay the support for process picking in Swift as its
> version of LLVM tends to lag behind the latest. I'd like to support process
> picking for older versions of lldb-dap because of this.
@matthewbastien I am not sure I understand that concern. Looking at the [commit
log of
swiftlang/llvm-project](https://github.com/swiftlang/llvm-project/commits/next/lldb/tools/lldb-dap),
it seems that they are picking up changes to `lldb-dap` very quickly. Or am I
missing something?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/128943
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
