> On Aug 10, 2014, at 3:08 PM, Keno Fischer <kfisc...@college.harvard.edu> > wrote: > > Yes, we benefit from registering with the system debugger, because we > commonly interoperate with C, C++, Fortran, etc. Admittedly we will > write our own functionality on top, but interoperating nicely with the > system debugger is a high priority for us.
I also agree that such interoperability is beneficial. I usually find that the amount of functionality on the client side necessitates a finer-grained interface. Can you elaborate what you add on top in your system? > >> On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Filip Pizlo <fpi...@apple.com> wrote: >> This is a design discussion. If you believe in the current design then you >> should be able to justify it with a more constructive reply. >> >> -Filip >> >> On Aug 10, 2014, at 1:55 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> Is there a reason why this client should get more attention than the >>>> seemingly more compelling non-C use cases? >>> >>> The presence of patches. >>> >>> Tim. _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
