jingham added a comment. In D61921#1502352 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D61921#1502352>, @xiaobai wrote:
> In D61921#1502338 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D61921#1502338>, @jingham wrote: > > > Getting it from the Process's m_language_runtimes is probably fine. On > > reflection, I can't think of a reason why you would want to iterate over > > all the available LanguageRuntimes, including the ones that hadn't been > > recognized in this Process yet. > > > > It's fine to do that in a separate patch. If you do that it would be good > > to back port it to the other iterations over the LanguageRuntimes. > > > Excellent, sounds good. I definitely intend to backport it to any other > iterations over LanguageRuntimes that I find. As for iterating over all > available LanguageRuntimes, this patch and my last few have sufficient > motivation for doing so, no? Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean. On macOS, there are a handful of runtimes that the Plugin Manager knows about - C++, ObjC, maybe Swift. But, for instance, we only load the ObjC language runtime into the process' m_language_runtimes array when we see libobjc.dylib get loaded. A pure C++ program might never load libobjc.dylib, and so even though the Plugin Manager knows we have support for the ObjC language runtime, that plugin wouldn't be active in the current lldb_private::Process. So there's a real difference between the "available" and the "currently loaded" runtimes. I was saying I didn't see any compelling reason to have an iterator over the available runtimes, just over the loaded ones. Not that we didn't need one or the other iterator. > > >> I don't see a really strong reason to make GetStepThroughTrampolinePlan a >> pure virtual method, this isn't required behavior for a language runtime. >> Why not make a default method that returns an empty thread plan? > > Thinking about it further, you're probably right here. Not every language > might have the need to handle this scenario. I'll update this patch with your > suggestion. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61921/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61921 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
