labath added a comment. In D61090#1479049 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D61090#1479049>, @jingham wrote:
> I really thought there was one at the SB layer, because in terms of design > that is what makes sense. I guess we never really needed it until now, so we > didn't add it. Once there's more than one hard-coded script interpreter, we > will need to add some way to select & direct scripts at the various script > interpreters so we will need SBScriptInterpreter at the SB layer. So maybe > now is the time to add it in preparation... > > Also, the fact that at the lldb_private layer, the ScriptInterpreter is held > onto by the CommandInterpreter is clearly wrong. The CommandInterpreter > should have a member that tells it the currently selected ScriptInterpreter, > but the list of script interpreters should belong to the Debugger. We should > probably disentangle that at the same time. Yes, it sounds like we should have a SBScriptInterpreter at some point. Though, right now, it's not really clear to me what will it's exact role be, so I would tend to agree with Greg that we wait until we have a real use case for it (so we don't commit to a design we may want to change later). > As an aside, IIUC, the current work to support either Python flavor only > supports one interpreter at a time because Python doesn't support loading > Python 2 & 3 into the same process? I've heard someone say that, and I can believe that is the official party line of the python project, but I haven't investigated how "true" that statement is. E.g., I'm pretty sure we could get it to work by using some of the fancier flags of dlopen (RTLD_LOCAL, or the new namespace thingies present on linux), but that may take more effort than it's worth.. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61090/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61090 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
