JDevlieghere added a comment. In D131138#3702608 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131138#3702608>, @jingham wrote:
> In D131138#3698508 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D131138#3698508>, @mib wrote: > >> This is awesome 🤩 ! I was also thinking of changing the way enums are >> exposed to python: instead of having everything added to the `lldb` python >> module, we could create a class per enum and have static attributes for each >> enum value so we could do something like `lldb.StopReason.Breakpoint`. That >> static variable could be a pair with the value/string representation or >> maybe we could use the `__str__` method to make it very pythonic. Just >> throwing some ideas here for later, but this LGTM 😊 ! > > I'm not sure you could do this w/o breaking binary compatibility, since we > pass these enums to a bunch of the SB API's. But if you can make that work, > this would be nice. I don't think that's possible, at least not without having both, which then defeats the purpose. I suggested to Ismail that we should start a document to keep track of all the things we want to improve for a V2 of the SB API. These kind of ideas come up every once in a while and it would be good to have them tracked somewhere so they don't get lost with time if/when we ever decide to redo the stable API. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D131138/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D131138 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
