This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: obsoleting annotate level 2
Peter Kovacs writes:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:34:31AM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> > If you have to keep supporting the old gdb, you will need to support
> > two interfaces to gdb. Unless you are importing MI into
> > 4.17.gnat.3.14p-1. If you have no control over 4.17.gnat.3.14p-1, and
> > supporting that is your primary goal, I don't see what FSF gdb can do
> > to correct that, ie I see two conflicting goals here.
> Yes, we will continue to support --annotate=2 as well as the MI
> interface. I'm not sure why you see 2 conflicting goals. Both
> interfaces can be supported with no problems, after all we're not
> interested in embedding our code into gdb itself.
OK, just wanted to point that out. They seem a conflicting in the
sense that one gdb is very old, and very different from the current
FSF one, but if you are ok with maintaining 2 interfaces, there is no
> > > As for the MI issues, I think we'd be willing to move over to the MI
> > > interface if and when it supports some of the readline style of input.
> > About readline, there was a conscious design decision to not provide
> > it with MI, because the editing capabilities would be implemented at a
> > different level, in the GUI console, not in gdb. With the interpreter
> > changes the console becomes now a concrete possibility. BTW, you may
> > want to take a look at Apple's Project Builder, I don't know what
> > level of editing they provided with their console.
> I'm not sure I understand this. How can the stand-alone GUI query gdb
> for a list of symbol names? For example, I type break m<tab>, and it
> completes to "main".
there is a bug open against the lack of a 'completion' kind of
command in MI. See bug 953 in http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/bugs/
> Unfortunately I don't have access to Apple's Project Builder. Do they
> offer the source to their debugger?
I think they do on their website. I don't have a pointer handy, sorry.
> gdb's console is already quite capable, and many people are extremely
> familiar with it. I think it would be a shame if we have to completely
> reimplement a console front-end to gdb.
insight does this too. Maybe that's another place to look.
> - Peter
> Peter D. Kovacs <email@example.com>