You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Most of the code we have on llnode doesn't have to be tied to lldb. We use lldb entirely for memory access (either on a core dump or living process). If we separate the code, providing an interface that can be implemented, we could provide multiple backends for llnode. For example, we could keep the lldb build and provide a smaller build in Webassembly using libelf and our own REPL to read the core dump (this would improve installation for users quite a bit).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Most of the code we have on llnode doesn't have to be tied to lldb. We use lldb entirely for memory access (either on a core dump or living process). If we separate the code, providing an interface that can be implemented, we could provide multiple backends for llnode. For example, we could keep the lldb build and provide a smaller build in Webassembly using libelf and our own REPL to read the core dump (this would improve installation for users quite a bit).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: