This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Archer project.
Re: pretty-printing update
>>>>> "AndrÃ" == AndrÃ PÃnitz <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
AndrÃ> But from a GUI point of view there is not really much
AndrÃ> difference whether gdb automatically looks in certain places
AndrÃ> for custom formatters or whether it has to pump a few hundred
AndrÃ> lines of "-var-set-format" into gdb "manually".
I think the problem here is naming of the formatters. Suppose we have
a custom formatters for a large number of libraries -- say one for
every C++ library in the OS. How would a front end know the names of
the various formatters to supply?
The nice thing about the auto-loading plan is that it means that
library authors can maintain formatting bits independently.
AndrÃ> Actually I would argue that the formatter code is pretty likely
AndrÃ> to depend more on the actual GUI than on the type (even with
AndrÃ> changing libstdc++ in mind). In the example I gave there are
AndrÃ> fields like "name" and "valueencoded" that will probably only
AndrÃ> make sense to a very specific GUI.
I see what you mean. I think the current MI code on this branch just
emits a couple of known fields. Maybe that is insufficient -- I don't