JDevlieghere wrote: > It's not clear from the patch description whether you actually need the > ability to suppress the command output, or if you just want the ability to > "access" the diagnostics. Because, if its the latter, then perhaps an (async) > event would be a slightly more lightweight alternative?
Yes, part of the requirement is that the output isn't printed by lldb itself, although the implementer is still in control with the return value. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125006 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
