JDevlieghere added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lldb/examples/python/crashlog.py:1198-1204 + option_parser.add_option( + '--skip-status', + '-s', + dest='skip_status', + action='store_true', + help='prevent the interactive crashlog to dump the process status and thread backtrace at launch', + default=False) ---------------- jingham wrote: > JDevlieghere wrote: > > Is there another way to detect that we're running in this kind of > > environment? For example, could we check if we're in an interactive lldb > > session? I imagine you'd like to have the same behavior as the IDE case if > > you imported the crashlog module in another Python file for example. One > > easy way to determine this is to check if `lldb.debugger` exists, but I'm > > not sure if that will cover the IDE case you're trying to solve. > I don't think we should be in the business of trying to auto-detect what the > caller's intentions are in this regard. For instance, I can easily imagine a > python utility that wants to get the crashlog, show it to the user, and also > do some logic on it, and having us dump it is really convenient. Plus the > development experience here would be bad. Someone would try out the crashlog > command in lldb and see the dump. Then they would run it in their program > and not see it. Then I think they would take our names in vain... The reason I brought it up is because we have another patch that adds another flag for Xcode. Each flag makes sense by itself, but if there's a way to detect this more generally and avoid a sprawl of flags I would prefer that. But I don't feel strongly about it as this more of a "slippery slope argument". Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D131036/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D131036 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
