llvm/llvm-project

[LLDB] Swig python extensions are missing test coverage

Open

#168,920 opened on Nov 20, 2025

View on GitHub
 (14 comments) (2 reactions) (0 assignees)C++ (10,782 forks)batch import
good first issuelldbtest-suite

Repository metrics

Stars
 (26,378 stars)
PR merge metrics
 (Avg merge 1d 2h) (1,000 merged PRs in 30d)

Description

@jimingham pointed out on #168619 that a lot of the lldb extensions are either not tested or don't have direct testing. I've opened this issue as a good new user issue.

The largest offenders are

While target and valueobject actually have more properties, a quick grep showed a lot of these are exercised in existing tests.

Contributor guide

Research direction
Examine the existing test suite for LLDB SWIG bindings, especially for SBFrameExtensions, SBTargetExtensions, and SBProcessExtensions. Identify patterns used in tests for similar extensions and write tests for the uncovered methods.
Tech stack
python
Domain
testing
Issue type
Test
DifficultyEstimated implementation difficulty for a new contributor, from 1 for very small changes to 5 for expert-level work.
3
Estimated timeA rough time range for an experienced contributor to investigate, implement, test, and prepare a pull request.
Half day
Activity statusHow available the issue appears right now: fresh, active, stale, blocked, or waiting on maintainer input.
Active
ClarityHow clearly the issue explains the expected change, acceptance criteria, and next step.
Clear
Prerequisites
PythonC++SWIGtesting
Newbie friendlinessA 1-100 score estimating how approachable this issue is for first-time contributors.
70