labath added a subscriber: aprantl.
labath added a comment.
My dream is to one day be able to define a property by simply declaring a
variable somewhere (say: `Property<T> Foo(ParentProperty, "foo", "description
of foo", DefaultValue);`), and that one could just get/set them via something
like `context[Foo] = new_value`. In that world, to tablegenning would hopefully
be necessary, but that world is still pretty far away, and your approach does
help with eliminating the redundancy, so maybe it's worth doing anyway... I
dunno...
Regarding the patch itself, I have two questions/comments:
- you put all property definitions into a single file, including those coming
from "plugins". This is kind of bad as the knowledge of plugin internals leaks
out. It may not be too bad, if the same effect could be achieved by just
putting the definitions into a separate file and running tablegen twice, and
this is just a way of avoiding that. It looks like that is the case here, but
I'm not 100% sure. It's something to keep an eye on, at least, particularly, if
we ever want to make "real" plugins.
- I'm wondering if the same effect could not be achieved in a more low-cost way
via a `.def` header file. I believe @aprantl had a patch like that at one
point. The .def file could just contain something like: `LLDB_PROPERTY(eFoo,
"foo", "description", default)`. When you want to define the enum, you just
have the macro expand to "eFoo", when you define the property itself, you have
it expand to the whole `{eFoo, ...}` blurb... The advantage of tablegen is that
it allows you to define the property list via some non-trivial algorithm, but
it's not clear to me whether this is needed/useful here...
Repository:
rLLDB LLDB
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D65185/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D65185
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
