ljmf00 added a comment. In D114668#3159640 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114668#3159640>, @bulbazord wrote:
> I think breaking it out of the Clang-specific class makes sense if we want > LLDB to be more language-agnostic. Do you have an idea of what bits of > `DWARFASTParserClang` can be moved out other than `ParseChildArrayInfo` and > `GetAccessTypeFromDWARF` (from the patch on top of this)? What is your > end-goal with this decoupling? I assume you want to work towards supporting > languages non-clang-based languages but I'm curious about the motivation. @bulbazord Yes, my plan is to make LLDB interfaces more language-agnostic, to accommodate D programming language DWARFASTParser and TypeSystem. I've seen other language plugins such as Go that simply copy and paste this method, but I want to make D addition clearer and avoid such duplication. You can see more similar changes on Clang-specific code decoupling on the stacked changes. I have made the requested changes, can you re-review, please? Also pinging @shafik . CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D114668/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D114668 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
