jankratochvil added a comment. In D67589#1674269 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D67589#1674269>, @clayborg wrote:
> We are making all efforts to vend a stable C++ API. IIUC you mean "stable C++ **ABI**" here. Thanks for the clarification. Maybe http://lldb.llvm.org/resources/sbapi.html could say that and it would be much more clear. > lldb_private::CommandReturnObjectImpl { > bool owned; > std::unique_ptr<lldb_private::CommandReturnObject> m_opaque_up; > }; Is this a request to rework this patch this way? If so isn't it safer / more clear to do it rather this way? lldb_private::CommandReturnObjectImpl { bool owned; lldb_private::CommandReturnObject *m_opaque_ptr; ~CommandReturnObjectImpl() { if (owned) delete m_opaque_ptr; } }; Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67589/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67589 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
