We are careful to make it possible to use SWIG to generate the scripting interfaces, and keep the interface to the scripting language language-neutral in lldb so that it will be possible for folks to plug in other scripting languages if they wish. So the choice of Python vrs. some other language isn't some kind of irreversible statement of identity on the part of the lldb team ;-)
I would have chosen Tcl because that's the one I like the best, but nobody else in the group was excited about Tcl. We asked around and except that Perl is obviously unsuited to being an embedded scripting language, the odds were pretty much even one against the other. People have very strong opinions, but they seemed more matters of taste than determinative. We had to pick one to start with, and Python seemed an okay choice. And again, since architecturally we wanted to be able to support whatever language somebody had an interest in implementing, spending the time getting started with some language was a better use of our time than spending it agonizing over which language to support... We'd be happy to help anybody who wants to take a stab at supporting another language in lldb, though we have lots to do, and are unlikely in the near term to take on responsibility for another language. Hope that helps, Jim On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:57 AM, Mandaris wrote: > Hello, > I'm just wondering why python was chosen as the scripting language for lldb. > I'm not trying to start a "My language is better than yours" thing just an > answer. > > If it boils down as a preference by the original developers, I can live with > that. > _______________________________________________ > lldb-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
