From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
To: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hooks still needed for annotations
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 00:21:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050701002052.GB2432@white> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050613031400.GF9288@nevyn.them.org>
> > Also, I think it's reasonable to say that GDB should have a parser that
> > FE's can use. The only way to have a parser that can be tested properly
> > is to allow it to be packaged and tested in GDB's testsuite. Otherwise,
> > if the annotations are removed, FE's like GVD, XXGDB, DDD, KGDB, ...
> > are either going to "go the way of the bison" or they are going to have
> > to write code that handles GDB/MI. Do we really want 5-10 GDB/MI
> > parser's out there (each with there own bugs)?
>
> This is also unrelated to the removal of annotations.
>
> I don't much think a parser is GDB's responsibility. Offering one as a
> convenience, sure, maybe. Note that a lot of frontends won't get to
> use it anyway! If we ship it with GDB, then it's going to be covered
> under the GPL.
The more I think of it, the more I feel that I am correct on this. Even
if the parser was under the GPL, proprietary projects (Apple?) could
simply use the parse tree to translate the data into a nice format of
there own (XML?) and then communicate that to a parser thats linked into
there application. This type of solution would allow a closed source
company to get the benefits of an MI parser/semantical analyzer,
contribute to the project, and not have to think 1 second about low
level MI stuff in there FE.
Bob Rossi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-07-01 0:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-06-01 7:15 Nick Roberts
2005-06-01 11:30 ` Bob Rossi
2005-06-01 21:31 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-03 19:09 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-03 22:35 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-03 23:59 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-04 3:19 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-03 17:03 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-07-03 22:13 ` Nick Roberts
2005-07-03 22:44 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-04 13:02 ` Bob Rossi
2005-06-13 3:14 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-15 15:52 ` Bob Rossi
2005-06-15 16:07 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-15 16:31 ` Bob Rossi
2005-07-03 16:45 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-06-15 23:07 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-15 23:29 ` Bob Rossi
2005-07-01 0:21 ` Bob Rossi [this message]
2005-07-01 1:18 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-06 21:57 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-10 2:26 ` Bob Rossi
2005-06-10 3:25 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-15 15:24 ` Bob Rossi
2005-06-15 21:38 ` Nick Roberts
2005-06-15 22:58 ` Bob Rossi
2005-07-03 16:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-07-06 15:03 ` Bob Rossi
2005-07-15 0:03 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050701002052.GB2432@white \
--to=bob@brasko.net \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=nickrob@snap.net.nz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox