This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: obsoleting annotate level 2

On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 01:48:17AM -0500, Jim Blandy wrote:
> Mike Mueller <> writes:
> > Jim Blandy wrote:
> > 
> > > The plan has been, for a very long time, to remove all 
> > > annotations.  I proposed keeping level one annotations.  Here was 
> > > my rationale:
> > 
> > > Level one annotations are implemented by code at two or three 
> > > points in GDB.  They're not a big deal to maintain.  And they're 
> > > what current releases of Emacs use.
> > 
> > > Level two annotations are implemented by (I think) around eighty
> > > different bits of code, scattered throughout GDB.
> > 
> > > Thus, while level one annotations are only a small maintenance 
> > > burden, level two annotations are.  Even if Emacs had been using 
> > > level two annotations for years, we would be trying to get rid of 
> > > them.
> > 
> > Jim,
> > 
> > Our only concern is that annotate 2 is the basis of our 
> > application.  Our request is that the removal of annotate 2 is done 
> > when MI is stable and is successfully used by at least one 
> > application.  Until MI has reached that point, our application will 
> > be forced to depend on annotate 2.
> MI is already successfully in use by one (admittedly non-free)
> application --- Apple's Power Builder.  Eclipse uses it now, too.
> MI is, by design, always going to be more stable than annotation level
> two.  MI imposes more structure on its output than annotation level
> two does.
> So I think MI is ready for the transition.
> When you do find something you need, ask here.  In most cases, it's
> very easy to add something to MI; when an easy case comes up, I'll
> point it out, and you can get a chance to try doing it yourself.  Once
> you can write your own patches to provide what you need, and you
> understand the GDB coding standards, I think things will go very
> quickly for you.

Is gdb-mi ready to be used in gdb-5.3? or should I check out the cvs
tree in order to start building the new interface between cgdb and gdb?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]