jingham added a comment. I don't think there's any battle. I wouldn't mind moving the command parsing code into llvm if there's a suitable replacement.
But so far as I can see llvm's command line parsing was primarily intended for parsing args for shell tools. So it lacks features required for a replacement to lldb's command line parser. The lldb interactive command interpreter absolutely needs completion callbacks. Nobody would be happy with lldb if it didn't complete filenames and symbols and the commands themselves. We also do shortest match rather than exact matches which folks find very handy. And you have to be able to provide our alias system which is also very heavily used. If somebody wants to add all these features to the llvm command line parser, then we could use it in lldb. I'm not sure that that would be a great idea, it might be seen to overly complicate the shell tool only parser. Anyway, I don't see a drop-in replacement in llvm. https://reviews.llvm.org/D43099 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
