Re: [PATCH] Hooks still needed for annotations

Nick Roberts
2005-06-10T03:25:13Z

Bob Rossi writes:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:57:48AM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote:
> >
> > > They are deprecated. I believe there's a clear consensus that the
> > > entire annotation system is going to go, and in the near future. Just
> > > not yet.
> >
> > Then lets try to remove the ones that can go. In 2003 Andrew introduced
> > level 3 annotations as a subset of level 2 (with the markup annotations
> > left out). Since then I have been using those quite happily with Emacs.
> >
> > So, as far as Emacs is concerned, the annotations that are restricted to
> > level 2 in annotate.c, and this must be over half of them, can go.
> >
> > Bob is this also the case for CGDB?
>
> I could look and see what annotations CGDB uses. Would this be helpful?
> I think it's only a handful.

Well there hasn't been any interest shown from the global maintainers, but I
think it would be helpful. Do you need any of the annotations that are
not generated by level 3 annotations? (Specified by
if (annotation_level == 2)... in annotate.c)

> > Emacs doesn't use breakpoints-invalid or frames-invalid either and they
> > spew out so often that it makes it hard to interrupt the inferior. However
> > I would like to keep them for the moment, as they provide clues as to where
> > to put code for event nortification in MI. Perhaps these could be restricted
> > to level 2.
>
> I still use level 2, and personally thought introducing level 3 was a
> really bad idea.

Why is it a bad idea?

> Do you already use level 3, or could we simply just start stripping down
> level 2?

Keeping level 3 allows a transition stage, I would now like to use it for
breakpoints-invalid and frames-invalid as stated above, in case I suddenly
find that Emacs does need them.

Nick