From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2134 invoked by alias); 9 May 2012 04:28:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 2114 invoked by uid 22791); 9 May 2012 04:28:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-wi0-f169.google.com) (209.85.212.169) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 May 2012 04:27:48 +0000 Received: by wibhn14 with SMTP id hn14so1221391wib.0 for ; Tue, 08 May 2012 21:27:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.101.103 with SMTP id ff7mr12064692wib.6.1336537667254; Tue, 08 May 2012 21:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.106.197 with HTTP; Tue, 8 May 2012 21:27:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120508220615.GB3671@klara.mpi.htwm.de> References: <87vck7wxs7.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120508220615.GB3671@klara.mpi.htwm.de> Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 04:28:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: GDB plugin From: Abhijit Halder To: =?ISO-8859-1?B?QW5kcukgUPZuaXR6?= Cc: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org ml" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: 2012-05/txt/msg00249.txt.bz2 On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Andr=E9 P=F6nitz wrote: > On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 11:16:11AM +0530, Abhijit Halder wrote: >> [...] I am not completely aware of the limitation of this approach, >> but it makes me happy thinking that the GDB users who want to extend >> GDB functionality but are not well accustomed with GDB source code, >> can still write their own pluggins and use an enhanced GDB without the >> pain of recompilation of entire GDB source code. > > I guess I fit the bill of a "user[s] who want to extend GDB > functionality but are not well accustomed with GDB source code" > rather well. It's something I've been doing for quite a while now. > However, the idea of writing plugins for GDB is not exactly > appealing to me. > > For one. the "pain of recompilation of entire GDB source code" you > mention does not exist. It's a straight-forward ./configure && > make, not even with enough waiting time for a successful trip to > the coffee maker (Unless you are on Windows and need to build all > dependencies, but that would not be different for plugins) > > Secondly, GDB is pretty extensible using Python scripting already, > giving "zero compile time" and platform independent access to a lot > of functionality. It's hard to see how compiled plugins would > improve that situation. I'd rather expect the effort for creating > and maintaining a plugin interface to eat into the already scarce > resources of the developers, for really not much benefit. > > So, please, pretty please, can we drop the idea? ;-) > > Andre' Well, I am not fully aware of Python interface. If this proposed idea does not make much any in current GDB, I will not push this. Thanks, Abhijit Halder