On July 30, 2017 7:15:29 AM GMT+03:00, Eli Zaretskii via lldb-dev
wrote:
> On July 30, 2017 7:05:52 AM GMT+03:00, Eli Zaretskii via lldb-dev
> wrote:
> > On July 30, 2017 6:30:04 AM GMT+03:00, Zachary Turner
> > wrote:
> > > Are we talking about some kind of mi support other than lldb's
> > > e
On July 30, 2017 7:05:52 AM GMT+03:00, Eli Zaretskii via lldb-dev
wrote:
> On July 30, 2017 6:30:04 AM GMT+03:00, Zachary Turner
> wrote:
> > Are we talking about some kind of mi support other than lldb's
> > existing MI
> > interface? Afaik it works reasonably well (for some definition of
> > r
On July 30, 2017 6:30:04 AM GMT+03:00, Zachary Turner
wrote:
> Are we talking about some kind of mi support other than lldb's
> existing MI
> interface? Afaik it works reasonably well (for some definition of
> reasonably well), and is even used for example in msvc on windows to
> support remote d
Are we talking about some kind of mi support other than lldb's existing MI
interface? Afaik it works reasonably well (for some definition of
reasonably well), and is even used for example in msvc on windows to
support remote debugging of non windows targets.
That said, most lldb developers are pai
> Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 22:43:59 +0200
> Cc: lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
> From: Jan Kratochvil via lldb-dev
>
> MI protocol was designed to minimize the amount of data transferred between
> gdb/lldb and a front end. But this communication isn't anything expensive as
> the debugger always runs on t
On Sat, 29 Jul 2017 21:59:03 +0200, ylluminate via lldb-dev wrote:
> And one thread seems to indicate that if if we could "convince LLDB
> developers to provide
> a decent implementation of the GDB/MI protocol,
That is an oxymoron.
MI protocol was designed to minimize the amount of data transfer
Developers here may or may not be aware that there's some serious interest from
Emacs users to have proper support for LLDB in Emacs.
There's been some pretty heated debate that included RMS, but the community has
pretty much told him what they think about his opinion and are willing to
accept
On 27 Jul 2017, at 00:41, Hans Wennborg via cfe-dev
wrote:
>
> 5.0.0-rc1 has just been tagged.
>
> Please build, test and upload binaries to the sftp. Let me know if
> there are any issues.
Built and tested rc1. Test failures on amd64-freebsd10:
FAIL: LLVM-Unit :: ExecutionEngine/Orc/./OrcJI
