teemperor added a comment.
In D103675#2800653 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D103675#2800653>, @brucem wrote:
> Not sure why this failed. Is it perhaps a difference where some processes
> have args including the executable and some do not?
Do you have the bot failures around for that? (Or, the platform at least so I
could reproduce it locally?)
================
Comment at: lldb/bindings/interface/SBProcessInfo.i:78
+
+ %feature("docstring",
+ "Return the specified argument given to the described process."
----------------
brucem wrote:
> teemperor wrote:
> > Can you add this line here?
> >
> > ```
> > %feature("autodoc", "GetArgumentAtIndex(int index) -> string")
> > GetArgumentAtIndex;
> > ```
> >
> > Otherwise the Python docs will mention that this returns `const char *`
> > which is always kinda weird for users to see.
> I changed this to have the whole thing be an autodoc rather than both an
> autodoc and a docstring. This isn't consistently done throughout the code
> though and in this case, the resulting syntax help is a bit different.
Sure, let's see how it looks on the website and then we can decide what works.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D103675/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D103675
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
