JDevlieghere added a comment. In D65489#1607801 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D65489#1607801>, @labath wrote:
> Why do we need a separate backend for this? Couldn't this be emitted as a > part of the same `#include "XXXProperties.inc"` which defines the property > definition? The two logically belong together, and the only reason they were > separate variables in the first place was the limitations of constexpr global > variables... I'm not sure what you mean by that last sentence, maybe because I don't know the history? Can you elaborate a bit on the "separate variables" part? To answer your question: the `OptionEnumValueElement`s are used both by properties and command options. Technically it is possible to put them in the same `.td` files, and emit them in the same `.inc` file. The actual code wouldn't change, just the way we invoke: instead of being its own backend, it would be called from both existing backends. I don't have a strong preference for either approach. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D65489/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D65489 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
