jimingham wrote:

> I have a larger question: can this API limitation be theoretically fixed? 
> Seems like an issue that can pop up again and again.
> 
> > To be clear, I don't think the original patch should have landed because it 
> > broke LLDB's stable ABI. Once something is added to the SBAPI, it cannot be 
> > modified or else it will break clients. As LLVM 23 is preparing for 
> > release, now is the time to fix this.
> 
> So, we cannot rename or delete existing functions... ever? Does it also mean 
> that even if bindings are fixed to not be ambiguous between different enums, 
> the mangled name of existing functions will change, thus breaking stable ABI?

That has been our stance - if you link against one version of LLDB.framework 
and use the SB API's you will be able to load future versions w/o having to 
rebuild your tool.  Ditto for scripts, we won't break extant scripts. 

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/218565
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to