medismailben wrote: I have some reservations about the effectiveness of this new approach: Instead of having a list in lldb-rpc with your ptr + length exceptions, now we need to mark manually every single method at the SBAPI level. If a new method gets added the SBAPI and the contributor doesn't add the macro, what would happen ? Would that break lldb-rpc ?
Given that the macro doesn't have some special logic to tell you which argument is the pointer and which one is the length, it doesn't look that useful to me: You could just have a heuristic to detect methods have a ptr+length arguments or better introduce a new `"SBBuffer"` type and add overloads to every methods that do ptr + length and deprecate the old implementations. I also think this is more of nice to have refactor than an blocking patch for lldb-rpc since you're current exception list is already working. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/148981 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
