Stepping one step back further in the thread ... On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-commits < lldb-comm...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Moving this back over to the list since I'm sure others have some input > here. Also +lldb-dev since it has more visibility than lldb-commits. > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:25 AM Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 8:18 AM Todd Fiala <todd.fi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Breaking out the binding generation into a separate step will also be >>> important for a couple reasons: >>> >>> * (from before) I want to eliminate the requirement for the vast >>> majority of the builds to have a swig on their system, and >>> >>> * (not stated before) we'd like to move away from swig for binding >>> generation at some point. >>> >> Is there any discussion or thoughts about what the options would be for moving away from swig? - Bruce
_______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
