clayborg added a comment. In D142926#4116417 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D142926#4116417>, @JDevlieghere wrote:
> In D142926#4115980 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D142926#4115980>, @clayborg > wrote: > >> In D142926#4115875 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D142926#4115875>, @JDevlieghere >> wrote: >> >>> In D142926#4114215 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D142926#4114215>, @bulbazord >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Not sure how useful it would be but I recorded the full list of methods >>>> get added with this change. Take a look and let me know if there are any >>>> that you think shouldn't be added. >>> >>> Thanks for generating that list. Given that the reproducers are not >>> functional, let's not add these to the Python API: >>> >>> SBReproducer::Capture(); >>> SBReproducer::Replay(const char *); >>> SBReproducer::Replay(const char *, bool); >>> SBReproducer::Finalize(const char *); >>> SBReproducer::GetPath(); >>> SBReproducer::Generate(); >> >> Are they not functional from native code? or just not functional from Python? > > The feature was removed but for ABI stability reasons we can't remove them > from the SB API. Most/all of them return an error saying the feature has been > removed. Does this mean we could submit a patch that removes all of the "LLDB_INSTRUMENT*" stuff that is in all of the SB*.cpp files? That would be great to clean that up if they are not needed. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D142926/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D142926 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
