From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2926 invoked by alias); 8 Aug 2008 05:10:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 2687 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2008 05:09:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (67.106.77.212) by sourceware.org with QMTP; 8 Aug 2008 05:09:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 13752 invoked by uid 305); 8 Aug 2008 01:10:57 -0400 Received: from icculus@icculus.org by gamehenge by uid 305 with qmail-scanner-1.22 (clamdscan: 0.75.1. Clear:RC:1(217.232.137.18):. Processed in 0.201842 secs); 08 Aug 2008 05:10:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freiheit-2.local) (icculus@217.232.137.18) by icculus.org with ESMTPA; 8 Aug 2008 01:10:57 -0400 Message-ID: <489BD504.7060108@icculus.org> Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 05:10:00 -0000 From: "Ryan C. Gordon" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Macintosh/20080707) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thiago Jung Bauermann CC: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Data plugins for gdb... References: <489B83F7.2080609@icculus.org> <20080808003020.GA17221@caradoc.them.org> <1218169143.11103.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1218169143.11103.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-08/txt/msg00187.txt.bz2 > Heh, been there, done that. :-) I just discovered this. :) Maybe that's the danger of DVCS...I pulled gdb into a Mercurial repository, the Python stuff is in a git repo, and no hint of this was in the main CVS when I looked to see if anyone else had done this. The lesson here is probably "check the mailing list archives first." > An alternative would be to add a new element to struct type pointing to > its pretty-printer (if any). I think this would be better, because then > you can be very specific about exactly which type you want to associate > with your semantically helpful visualizer. Think lookup_typename here, > which looks up a type within a lexical block (at least that's what its > description says). I think that's a good idea. I was concerned about variations ("struct A" in C code vs "A" in C++, not to mention the usual template and namespace madness, non-C languages, etc). My patch was just experimenting to see what could be done, and I was pretty pleased at how well I could hook in without any prior understanding of the gdb code. I'll take a look at the Python work. Thanks, --ryan.