mib added a comment. In D120100#3331141 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D120100#3331141>, @JDevlieghere wrote:
> Removing the enum from SBDebugger is an ABI breaking change. I think this has > been in tree for a while, so if we shipped this like this in the last > release, we cannot guarantee that this won't break anyone. Can we avoid the > issue by defining the enum in the interface file? Please, correct me if I'm wrong but in my understanding, this is partially implemented from the ABI standpoint as it's not defined in the SWIG interface file. Even though it's defined in the C++ liblldb, I don't think it reaches a bigger audience than the Python `lldb` module. Defining it in the interface file will increase the maintenance burden so I think it's reasonable to "break" the ABI in this case. Do you see any objection @clayborg ? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D120100/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D120100 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
