================
@@ -45,6 +45,36 @@ SBValue instance which interprets the value object as
representing the head of a
linked list."
) lldb::SBValue;
+%feature("docstring", "
+Returns true if the SBValue holds any useful state
+and false otherwise.
+IsValid is a very weak API, lldb will only return
+invalid SBValues if it has no useful information
+about the SBValue.
+The two main ways you will end up with an invalid
+SBValue are:
+1) default constructed SBValues are not valid.
+2) SBValues that have outlived their SBTarget are
+no longer valid since its not safe to ask them
----------------
bulbazord wrote:
I don't think the update addressed my comment. `GetError` will certainly tell
you why something is invalid, but it doesn't specify the consequences of doing
the unsafe action of asking the invalid SBValue questions. I guess what I'm
asking is, does "not safe" refer to "safety against crashes" or "safety against
invalid data"? I assume it's the latter, so I would suggest saying something
like "It's not safe to ask them questions, the returned values may look valid
even when they are not".
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94007
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
