Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
Cc: simon.marchi@ericsson.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: Add table of MI versions
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 17:04:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <83pnswcz5t.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b64943abaa771c26d03053ae6c5ce9e5@polymtl.ca> (message from Simon	Marchi on Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:37:45 -0500)

> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:37:45 -0500
> From: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
> Cc: simon.marchi@ericsson.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> Since @sc{gdb/mi} is used by a variety of front ends to
> @value{GDBN}, changes to the MI interface may break existing usage.
> This section describes how the protocol changes and how to request
> previous version of the protocol when it does.

OK, thanks.

> >   new versions of the MI protocol are not compatible with the old
> >   versions
> 
> I thought this was quite obvious by the fact that we say that we 
> introduce a new version when we make breaking changes.  But I can add 
> this sentence, which would result in this:
> 
> If the changes are likely to break front ends, the MI version level
> will be increased by one.  The new versions of the MI protocol are not 
> compatible
> with the old versions.  Old versions of MI remain available, allowing 
> front ends
> to keep using them until they are modified to use the latest MI version.

Fine by me.

> >> About the idea itself, I don't think we need to implement this.
> > 
> > We don't need to agree with it, we just need to preserve the
> > suggestion.
> 
> I have opened [1], is it fine to remove the comment from gdb.texinfo?

No objections from me.

> >> If front ends request a specific version of MI (which is good
> >> practice, in my experience), they won't need to query it.
> > 
> > What if a front end can support several versions, provided that it
> > knows the latest version which is provided?  Why require such a front
> > end to request the lowest common denominator, instead of adapting to
> > the latest version it can support?
> 
> I don't think we require front ends to use the lowest common 
> denominator.  Instead, it should request 
> max(version_known_by_the_front_end, version_known_by_gdb).

And I think version_known_by_gdb needs this command, doesn't it?

Thanks.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-01-16 17:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-14 20:39 Simon Marchi
2019-01-15 17:28 ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-01-15 18:27   ` Simon Marchi
2019-01-15 19:20     ` Eli Zaretskii
2019-01-15 20:37       ` Simon Marchi
2019-01-16 17:04         ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2019-01-16 17:21           ` Simon Marchi
2019-01-16 20:57             ` André Pönitz
2019-01-16 19:35           ` Simon Marchi

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=83pnswcz5t.fsf@gnu.org \
    --to=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=simon.marchi@ericsson.com \
    --cc=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
    /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