lawrence_danna added a comment. In D68546#1705684 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68546#1705684>, @labath wrote:
> Well... if we agree that SBStream is the future for APIs like this, then I > don't think that would be too strange. The FileSP and FILE* variants would > both be "legacy/deprecated" and present only to support legacy c++/python > uses, and the SBStream would be the thing which we expect new users to use. > > That said, I don't think that having an SBFile-based API is that bad either > (though I would still like if it is used via an SBStream internally).. The > main advantage of the "higher level" stream interface I see is that it is > easier to provide your own implementation of it (less methods to override). > However, given that we've just went through the exercise of making the file > API overridable externally, I don't think we'll want to create an overridable > stream abstraction any time soon. Ok I'll just update it to go though `StreamFile` internally and leave the decision of whether a `SBStream` version should be added to a later patch and/or someone else to decide. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D68546/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D68546 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
