>>! In D6123#11, @jingham wrote: > As I understood it originally, the NativeProcess stuff would end up replacing > the guts of the ProcessLinux, etc, but in a way that would easily allow you > to slot them into llgs as well. That’s why I thought of them as some kind > ur-process plugin. > > Jim
Yea, in my mind I've always imagined llgs as just using all of the local debugging process plugin stuff as well. Part of the reason why I'm not too concerned with it atm for Windows, because when it does come time for it, all the hard stuff will already be written in the ProcessWindows plugin, and you just have to glue it together. I guess what we're looking at now is the unfinished glue, so there's a little bit of both. It probably would have been less confusing if there were like ProcessLinuxRemote so that it's clear that for now, the two codepaths don't use each other. Either way, I'll go ahead and put this stuff in Plugins and make a Plugins include directory for now. Going forward I'm going to keep modularity in mind when getting local debugging stuff working on Windows, so that we can reuse all of it when llgs starts coming together. http://reviews.llvm.org/D6123 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
