JDevlieghere added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lldb/examples/python/crashlog.py:434
except CrashLogFormatException:
- return TextCrashLogParser(debugger, path, verbose).parse()
+ return object().__new__(TextCrashLogParser)
----------------
mib wrote:
> kastiglione wrote:
> > I have not seen the `object().__new__(SomeClass)` syntax. Why is it being
> > used for `TextCrashLogParser` but not `JSONCrashLogParser`? Also, `__new__`
> > is a static method, could it be `object.__new__(...)`? Or is there a subtly
> > that requires an `object` instance? Somewhat related, would it be better to
> > say `super().__new__(...)`?
> >
> > Also: one class construction explicitly forwards the arguments, the other
> > does not. Is there a reason both aren't implicit (or both explicit)?
> As you know, python class are implicitly derived from the `object` type,
> making `object.__new__` and `super().__new__` pretty much the same thing.
>
> In this specific case, both the `TextCrashLogParser` and `JSONCrashLogParser`
> inherits from the `CrashLogParser` class, so `JSONCrashLogParser` will just
> inherits `CrashLogParser.__new__` implementation if we don't override it,
> which creates a recursive loop.
> That's why I'm calling the `__new__` method specifying the class.
What's the advantage of this over this compared to a factory method? Seems like
this could be:
```
def create(debugger, path, verbose)
try:
return JSONCrashLogParser(debugger, path, verbose)
except CrashLogFormatException:
return TextCrashLogParser(debugger, path, verbose)
```
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D131085/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D131085
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
