> On Jul 8, 2014, at 5:05 PM, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > Is there any reason for a single instance of a ProcessInstanceInfoList to > ever contain processes from multiple platforms all in the same list?
It really depends on what you are connecting to. For desktop, they will all probably be similar. But when a bare board JTAG connection lists the processes (which in the bare board case means core groups), then they might have some differences. > > I'm trying to figure out if there's a good way to separate out the platform > specific details of a Process / ProcessInstanceInfo / ProcessLaunchInfo / > ProcessAttachInfo and this is coming into play. > > For example, if there's no way for processes from two different platforms to > be in the same list, then in theory these classes could be templatized with a > "Details" class, and you could have, for example, a PosixProcessDetails and a > WindowsProcessDetails. This could be implemented, but we will need to make sure that any plug-ins that use ProcessLaunchInfo and ProcessAttachInfo doesn't require anything from the ProcessDetails class, or if they do, have some sort of llvm::dyn_cast operator to they can extra the required details from PosixProcessDetails or WindowsProcessDetails directly. > I feel like at a high level, the core debugger shouldn't really care about > platform specific details, and it's there now as a matter of convenience > (e.g. for easy dumping). So if there's a better way to represent this, it > seems like it would be beneficial. Feel free to submit a patch by specializing the details into classes as you state above. If these details aren't needed for attaching or launching, then I guess this will just help pretty printing. Is your motivation to avoid seeing the extra posix style info in some dumps? Greg _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
