This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] Indirect access to GDB history variables
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- Cc: steverod at netapp dot com, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 20:40:02 +0200
- Subject: Re: [patch] Indirect access to GDB history variables
- References: <20061215024050.GA8750@linden.netapp.com> <20061216171025.GB14012@nevyn.them.org>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 12:10:25 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
>
> Changing the CLI is touchy because of how weakly specified it is.
Do we have a substantial body of test cases for CLI in the test suite?
If we do, and if this change doesn't break anything there, I think we
can reasonably expect it to be safe.
> I think that we should take the long-postponed jump to embedding
> scripting languages, rather than adding more complexity to the existing
> CLI.
If we leave the current CLI available in non-interactive sessions, and
if the embedded language will satisfy Steve's needs, I'm for it. But
I fear that agreeing on the language will take time, in which case
postponing this change will be just that.
> Maybe I'll take another stab at that this weekend.
Thanks.