The idea of having a static function in SBDebugger that returns lldb 
configuration information seems good to me.

Having the API return an SBStructuredData with the full configuration 
information seems like a pretty future-proof way to do this.  I can't see that 
this data will get sufficiently large that consing up the whole set of config 
options to answer a single question is going to be a problem, and the info is 
constant for the run of lldb, so you can cache the result.


> On Feb 5, 2018, at 4:01 AM, Pavel Labath via lldb-dev 
> <> wrote:
> Hello all,
> In <> we have a feature that only works
> when lldb was built with xml support. To  test this, we need the test
> to know whether we were build with xml support.
> The typical llvm solution would be to generate some dotest equivalent
> of at build time, which we could then load from the test
> and query for build settings.
> However, it has occurred to me that the information about various
> build properties (xml suport, libedit support, list of llvm targets we
> support) is something that could be useful to other liblldb clients as
> well. So, another way of exposing this would be to have a function
> (maybe a static function on SBDebugger ?) that the test can call and
> get the required information that way.
> Do you have any thoughts on how this should be handled? Or maybe know
> of an existing way that we could check this information already?
> regards,
> pavel
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list

lldb-dev mailing list

Reply via email to