This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: GDB and scripting languages - which
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: "Kaz Kylheku" <kaz at zeugmasystems dot com>
- Cc: jimb at codesourcery dot com, gdb at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 23:20:16 +0200
- Subject: Re: GDB and scripting languages - which
- References: <66910A579C9312469A7DF9ADB54A8B7D58107B@exchange.ZeugmaSystems.local>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 10:29:24 -0800
> From: "Kaz Kylheku" <kaz@zeugmasystems.com>
>
> Jim Blandy wrote:
> > I would prefer that GDB use a single extension language, and that that
> > language be Python.
>
> I think it would be best to have a libgdb.so shared library with a
> well-defined API. Then people can write their own bindings to call it
> from whatever programming environment suits them.
Aren't we talking about a scripting language to allow decent scripting
_inside_ GDB, i.e. about extension _to_ GDB, as opposed to making GDB
an extension of other programs?
> Guile is not even particularly attractive people who are already Scheme
> programmers. For serious Scheme work, there are better implementations
> out there.
Aren't we talking about a language for extending GDB, as opposed to a
language ``for serious Scheme work''?