granata.enrico added a comment. Currently I don't think SBTypeSummary allows for defining formatters backed by a CXXFunctionSummaryFormat It would, however, be a great addition to our API. Is it a change you're interested in working on?
If so, the easy part is going to be introducing LLVM-style RTTI for TypeSummaryImpl such that one can replace the ->IsScripted() calls with a proper switch over all kinds of summaries (there's three, you're gonna want to introduce a fourth - read below). The slightly more interesting part is that currently CXXFunctionSummaryFormat expects to transact in ValueObjects and std::strings. These are things we cannot expose at the SB layer. So we might need to add yet another kind of summary that instead takes an SBValue, an SBSummaryOptions and fills in an SBStream. Once we have that, the MI could actually use the functionality to register its own summaries (and if we find SBValue to be lackluster in any way as a result, we should fill in those gaps). http://reviews.llvm.org/D13657 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
