Re: MI: type prefixes for values

[Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>]

 > Are there any compatibility concerns, i.e. should we make this change
 > for mi3 only?  Could some frontend rely on these outputs?  I don't
 > think Eclipse does - it looks like it has some substantial code
 > to skip them, though, so at least it is aware of them.

Unlike Volodya's change, its not a change in the MI protocol but one of
presentation, so I would put it mi2 -i.e the curent default mi (recall that
-i=mi sets mi_version to 2).

I think a large project like Eclipse should follow GDB development to ensure
that changes in MI that are incompatible with their use aren't made.  At some
stage a gdb-mi@sourceware.org mailing list might be appropriate with patches
also going to gdb-patches.

Since there are likely to be many more changes to MI, I suggest that when we
start making changes for mi3 only, the default remains at mi2.  This will
allow a period of development for mi3 during which changes can be made more
freely.  It could then be made the default level after it has stabilised.


-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob