[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar updated this revision to Diff 410920. d-millar added a comment. Rebased on v14 Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409 Files: lldb/CMakeLists.txt lldb/bindings/CMakeLists.txt

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar updated this revision to Diff 389021. d-millar added a comment. minor fixes re unnecessary requirement and ConstString->StringRef Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409 Files: lldb/CMakeLists.txt

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

Am sorry I can't commit build resources, but am certainly willing to commit time to solving test problems. In a very general sense, I think our project (Ghidra) will effectively be a test platform for issues with the Java bindings to SWIG. With regard to the set-up for testing, I have

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

teemperor added a comment. In D111409#3124194 , @labath wrote: > In D111409#3124075 , @teemperor > wrote: > >>> Are you asking for dedicated physical resources for running nightly builds? >> >> I don't think any

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

labath added a comment. In D111409#3124075 , @teemperor wrote: >> Are you asking for dedicated physical resources for running nightly builds? > > I don't think any of the current bots have a Java installation so I think > it's either that or we get

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

teemperor added a comment. > Are you asking for dedicated physical resources for running nightly builds? I don't think any of the current bots have a Java installation so I think it's either that or we get someone with a bot to setup the required Java installation. FWIW, if no one wants to

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar added a comment. Apologies in advance - this may be a repeat message. Our server went down for maintenance mid-send. So, looking at https://llvm.org/docs/HowToAddABuilder.html, I think I need some clarification on your request regarding a build bot. Are you asking for dedicated

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

Hi Jonas, Apologies for the non-build - I did a fetch/rebase this morning before creating the patch. Do I need to be on a different branch re StringRef vs ConstString? (Have seen that discussion in passing but confess I did not follow it in detail.) Any pointers appreciated. Re testing,

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

JDevlieghere added a comment. Hi David, this looks really comprehensive. As far as the code is concerned, it has all the parts that we'd want to support another scripting language in LLDB. That leaves us with the last remaining questions: - Testing: having a bot that actually builds & tests

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar updated this revision to Diff 386169. d-millar added a comment. OK, well, took my some time but I have made an attempt to address the three areas described by Mr. Ingham: //Support for a scripting language in lldb has three distinct pieces. 1. Making the SB API's available to the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

jingham added a comment. Sounds good. When we started adding extension points for python, we made the implementations be free functions. But then over time we realized it was often more convenient if you had a object managing the callback, that way it could more easily store state over the

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar added a comment. Discussing it with developers here, they agreed with your opinion that we really really ought to do 2.  As you just noted, 3 is trickier. Java doesn't really have a REPL. It has jshell - we're not sure that counts. In any case, am up for tackling 2. Will keep

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

jingham added a comment. In D111409#3052192 , @d-millar wrote: > Just to clarify my use case: I am one of the developers for a > reverse-engineering tool called Ghidra. Part of the tool is > debugging-support to allow cross-over between dynamic and

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

Just to clarify my use case: I am one of the developers for a reverse-engineering tool called Ghidra. Part of the tool is debugging-support to allow cross-over between dynamic and static analysis. We currently support windbg/kd, the gcc MI2 interface, and direct Java debugging. I have a

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

jingham added a comment. Support for a scripting language in lldb has three distinct pieces. 1. Making the SB API's available to the scripting languages 2. Adding all the callbacks so the scripting language can be used for breakpoint callbacks, data formatters, etc. 3. Adding a REPL for that

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar added a comment. Ah, OK, after more digging, I realize I have probably provided only half of what you would like for this commit. My primary intention was to expose the SB API so I could make calls from Java into it, but for it to be, in some sense, a full-fledged member of the API,

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

I'm not sure I understand your testing strategy, in particular how it applies to the existing Lua and Python extensions. I am looking at the files in lldb/unittests/ScriptInterpreter/Lua Do you execute test from native Lua/Python environments or through C wrappers-only? You mentioned a bot -

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar updated this revision to Diff 378288. d-millar added a comment. FIx for potential conflicts with master. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409 Files: lldb/bindings/java/java-typemaps.swig

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar updated this revision to Diff 378282. d-millar added a comment. Another (hopefully cleaner) attempt. If the addition of SBTraceOptions in lldb/source/API/CMakelists.txt conflicts, please feel free to delete it. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

mib added a comment. In D111409#3051556 , @d-millar wrote: > Hmmm, well, have tried running "git clang-format" with a few different > invocations, but seem to always get "No modified files to format." > Suggestions? I was confused by the `patch`

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar added a comment. Hmmm, well, have tried running "git clang-format" with a few different invocations, but seem to always get "No modified files to format." Suggestions? From: David Millar via Phabricator Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 11:33:37 AM To:

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

Merde - I followed you instructions but forgot to run clang-format. Give me a minute From: Raphael Isemann via Phabricator Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 11:24:10 AM To: David Millar; anoro...@apple.com; fallk...@yahoo.com; kkle...@redhat.com;

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar updated this revision to Diff 378237. d-millar added a comment. supplying a better patch file Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409 Files: lldb/bindings/java/CMakeLists.txt patch Index: patch

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

teemperor added a comment. No problem, first time using Phabricator is always a bit confusing. You can just do a `git diff -U99 > ~/java-patch.diff`, click the "Update Diff" button on the top right of this website and then select *just* this diff file that contains your changes.

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

mib added a comment. In D111409#3051140 , @d-millar wrote: > Am obviously brand new to your process and a bit of an old dog when it comes > to learning new tricks. Would you prefer I make a new submission with the > -U99 diff? Also, am more than

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

Am obviously brand new to your process and a bit of an old dog when it comes to learning new tricks. Would you prefer I make a new submission with the -U99 diff? Also, am more than willing to help with the Java tests if that would be useful. From:

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

teemperor added a comment. In D111409#3051110 , @d-millar wrote: > Apologies for the inclusion of that last file "patch" - that is the "git diff > -U999" result, should that be useful. You can just upload that diff file and Phabricator will display

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar added a comment. Apologies for the inclusion of that last file "patch" - that is the "git diff -U999" result, should that be useful. Repository: rLLDB LLDB CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D111409

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D111409: proposed support for Java interface to Scripting Bridge

d-millar created this revision. d-millar added a reviewer: LLDB. Herald added subscribers: teemperor, mgorny. d-millar requested review of this revision. The patch include files necessary to extend the Scripting Bridge API with Java. The edits follow the existing patterns for Python and Lua.