jingham added a comment.
This seems like a pretty non-intrusive way of protecting the lldb_private side
of the SB API construction.
Looking at the patch makes it seem like we've been semi-randomly assorting
members of the SB classes to "protected" and "private". We have NO intentions
of ever subclassing these classes, so protected vrs. private is a meaningless
distinction (thus the seeming randomness of the assignment, maybe?) It would
be cleaner to go make them all private, since we don't intend to offer these
for subclassing... But this patch is getting big already, probably don't want
to fold that into this one.
================
Comment at: lldb/unittests/API/SBCommandInterpreterTest.cpp:24
SBDebugger::Initialize();
m_dbg = SBDebugger::Create(/*source_init_files=*/false);
}
----------------
It isn't clear to me how the changes in this file fit in with your overall goal?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D150157/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D150157
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
