labath added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39844#920722, @clayborg wrote:
> I see your point. But if we do ask a template parameter for its type, I would > like to be able to get it's type somehow. Seems wrong to leave this out. I > know it doesn't mirror clang, but we should do the right thing here. At least > at the SB API layer. I am fine with leaving the new TypeSystem calls as you > added them. If the thing your worried about is not being able to access the type of the integral template argument, I can add a new method to SBType which would return it's value and the type, mirroring the way TypeSystem does it (it would probably have to return something through an argument, as swig would probably choke on std::pair). https://reviews.llvm.org/D39844 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
