Thank you.
On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Tatyana Krasnukha <tatyana.krasnu...@synopsys.com> wrote: > Hi Ramana, > > Looks like just a naming issue - classes derived from RegisterInfoInterface > should be named as RegisterInfo<OS>_<Arch>, because they just implement a > common interface to access targets's register info structures. Whereas > RegisterContext relates to certain execution context and concrete frame, and > implements process-specific functions, for example restoring registers state > after expression evaluation. > > Please, correct me anyone, if I'm wrong. > > Tatyana > > -----Original Message----- > From: lldb-dev [mailto:lldb-dev-boun...@lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of Ramana > via lldb-dev > Sent: Wednesday, 13 September, 2017 9:00 AM > To: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org > Subject: [lldb-dev] lldb_private::RegisterContext vs > lldb_private::RegisterInfoInterface > > Hi, > > When deriving RegisterContext<OS>_<Arch>, why some platforms (Arch+OS) are > deriving it from lldb_private::RegisterContext while others are deriving from > lldb_private::RegisterInfoInterface or in other words how to decide on the > base class to derive from between those two and what are the implications? > > Thanks, > Ramana > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_lldb-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=8NZfjV_ZLY_S7gZyQMq8mj7tiN4vlymPiSt0Wl0jegw&m=YZ3Zmbvj4mvkuTSfZ9-gC0Gi1rMMrrPaSTL8YBCytAM&s=55CKoDxnRsC-dUPbL7T3sQ2HL74C2foFRhvssSATbbw&e= _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
