mib added a comment. In D155161#4516564 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D155161#4516564>, @bulbazord wrote:
> I'm good with this approach. One thing to note is that this change is > explicitly **ABI breaking**. Specifically this change removes > `lldb::ScriptedObject` so `SBProcess::GetScriptedImplementation`'s return > value changes. `lldb::ScriptedObject` was originally added in February 2023 > (see: `c1928033047409f977b26ffc938d59188f1ced97`) so this has not made it > into an LLDB release so far. Even though this does break ABI, from a release > perspective this should be okay to do since it's technically additive when > compared to the previous release. That is true, this change is ABI breaking, but as you mentioned it, this hasn't been distributed to other client and should only be used by us. Also, I've changed the typemap so that this change is transparent to people who were using this API from python (you might have notices that I didn't have to change the test for `GetScriptedImplementation`). CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D155161/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D155161 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
