Re: [lldb-dev] The two PDB plugins in LLDB

2021-11-03 Thread Martin Storsjö via lldb-dev
CC Nico On Wed, 3 Nov 2021, Pavel Labath wrote: [+ aleksandr] On 03/11/2021 09:18, Martin Storsjö via lldb-dev wrote: As far as I know, this is clearly the intended direction, but my understanding is also that the native PDB plugin isn't quite on the same functionality level yet. While t

Re: [lldb-dev] The two PDB plugins in LLDB

2021-11-03 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-dev
[+ aleksandr] On 03/11/2021 09:18, Martin Storsjö via lldb-dev wrote: On Tue, 2 Nov 2021, Raphael Isemann via lldb-dev wrote: Unless removing the non-native PDB plugin has some negative impact on users (e.g., missing features in native plugin that work with the non-native plugin), I would prop

Re: [lldb-dev] The two PDB plugins in LLDB

2021-11-03 Thread Martin Storsjö via lldb-dev
On Tue, 2 Nov 2021, Raphael Isemann via lldb-dev wrote: Unless removing the non-native PDB plugin has some negative impact on users (e.g., missing features in native plugin that work with the non-native plugin), I would propose we delete it and only keep the native PDB plugin in LLDB which seems

[lldb-dev] The two PDB plugins in LLDB

2021-11-02 Thread Raphael Isemann via lldb-dev
Hi all, I'm currently working on a patch that requires updating to all our debug information parsers and I noticed that we have two PDB plugins. One seems to be 'native' and uses a LLVM-internal parser while the non-native reuses parts of Microsoft DIA SDK from what I can see. IIUC the native plu