From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15565 invoked by alias); 8 Aug 2005 13:05:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 15547 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Aug 2005 13:05:22 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Aug 2005 13:05:22 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.52) id 1E27Jd-0002P2-Fh; Mon, 08 Aug 2005 09:05:17 -0400 Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2005 13:05:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts , Jim Ingham Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: MI output during program execution Message-ID: <20050808130516.GA9046@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , Jim Ingham , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <17142.56731.941946.838268@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17142.56731.941946.838268@farnswood.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-08/txt/msg00087.txt.bz2 On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 04:20:43PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > > Although Emacs will increasingly use GDB/MI to interact with GDB, the GUD > buffer will always require the use of CLI commands. These are executed via > "-interpreter-exec console" that Jim Ingham/Apple contributed. In general > this isn't a problem, but CLI commands which start the inferior e.g run, next, > finish etc do not tell Emacs when the inferior is executing (do not output > ^running) and in some cases generate inappropriate output such as the current > source line as CLI output. I would like to change the output of these > commands to that of their MI counterparts. I think that Apple have added a > separate interpreter (console-quoted) for this kind of thing. The patch below > reflects my more modest resources and limited knowledge and seems to do the > kind of thing that Emacs needs. It doesn't change direct use of MI commands, > just the behaviour of a subset of CLI commands invoked the the MI interpreter: Fortunately, we've got access to all these bright folks at Apple. Does the console-quoted approach sound good to you? Jim, is a recent snapshot of the code for it available? The following has no frontend implementation experience behind it whatsoever. However, it's relevant from my few tries at adding full scripting support to GDB. What I'd like to see is a way to keep multiple interpreters open at the same time. Then, have one of them accepting input at a time, and receiving informative output, but all of them receiving some kinds of output. For instance, all open MI channels could receive a notice on breakpoint deletion, no matter where the request came from. If the console starts GDB running in this case, the MI interpreter would still get a ^running. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC