This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: obsoleting the annotate level 2 interface
- From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
- To: jimb at redhat dot com
- Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com, djgpp-workers at delorie dot com
- Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 21:03:02 +0300
- Subject: Re: obsoleting the annotate level 2 interface
- References: <vt265sjj6vi.fsf@zenia.red-bean.com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at is dot elta dot co dot il>
> From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
> Date: 21 Jan 2003 02:32:01 -0500
>
> GDB seems to support two different ways of doing detailed annotations
> of its output for consumption by other programs: MI and 'set annotate
> 2'. I don't think annotation level 2 has many active users, if any at
> all. It pervades GDB's code. Would it make sense to put 'set
> annotate 2' on the path to obsolescence?
It's possible that RHIDE, the Turbo-C compatible IDE developed for
DJGPP, uses "annotate 2" (RHIDE has the GDB core built into it). I CC
the DJGPP developers' mailing list, in the hope that someone who knows
more than myself about the debugging engine of RHIDE will tell whether
I'm wrong.