Re: [RFC] New GDB/MI command "-info-gdb-mi-command"

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>]

> Pedro> Just a POC.  Of course, we'd have to go audit all MI "error" calls.
> 
> It seems like a reasonable idea to me.

The idea of a specific and documented error code seems much more robust
to me.

Regarding invalid switches, we may have to extend the current proposal
to allow the command to specific what in the usage caused problem?
In my proposal, it was easy to extend by adding a "feature=[...]"
list to the output. Or maybe that's overkill? Or use list-features
for that instead?

I'd like us to decide to something I can go and implement. Either way,
I think we can start by concentrating with the initial goal, which is
to determine whether a command exists or not. People seem to have reacted
more positively to the idea of try-and-fallback approach, shall we go
with Pedro's idea (without the "invalid switch"/"usage" part)?

Thanks,
-- 
Joel