================
@@ -67,6 +67,10 @@ class LLDB_API SBExpressionOptions {
void SetTrapExceptions(bool trap_exceptions = true);
void SetLanguage(lldb::LanguageType language);
+ /// Set the language using a pair of language code and version as
+ /// defined by the DWARF 6 specification.
+ /// WARNING: These codes may change until DWARF 6 is finalized.
+ void SetLanguage(uint16_t dwarf_lname_code, uint32_t dwarf_lversion);
----------------
JDevlieghere wrote:
This feels wrong. How would you feel about exposing `SourceLanguage` as
`SBSourceLanguage` and having a SetLanguage overload that takes that as an
argument? It seems like a small difference, but I think it conceptually makes
sense to initialize an `SBSourceLanguage` with a dwarf code/version.
As an added benefit it's also more future proof, if we need to extend the
class, or want to use it elsewhere in the SB API where we currently use
`lldb::LanguageType`. A quick grep shows 21 instances of `lldb::LanguageType`
and if we thread this through more I could imagine wanting to have the ability
of passing an `SBSourceLanguage` like we do here.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/89981
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
