From: Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@ericsson.com>
To: "'André Pönitz'" <andre.poenitz@mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de>,
"'Mircea Gherzan'" <mircea.gherzan@intel.com>
Cc: "'tromey@redhat.com'" <tromey@redhat.com>,
"'vladimir@codesourcery.com'" <vladimir@codesourcery.com>,
"'gdb-patches@sourceware.org'" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC] Fix the MI result of -break-insert with multiple locations
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:42:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E59706EF8DB1D147B15BECA3322E4BDC096BF6@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130129194520.GA3727@klara.mpi.htwm.de>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: apoe@hrz.tu-chemnitz.de
> [mailto:apoe@hrz.tu-chemnitz.de] On Behalf Of André Pönitz
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:45 PM
> To: Mircea Gherzan
> Cc: tromey@redhat.com; vladimir@codesourcery.com; Marc
> Khouzam; gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Fix the MI result of -break-insert with
> multiple locations
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 03:36:04PM +0100, Mircea Gherzan wrote:
> > The current MI output when printing a breakpoint with
> multiple locations
> > is not conformant to the MI specification:
> >
> > bkpt={number="1", ...},{number="1.1", ...},{number="1.2", ...}
> >
> > This patch fixes this issue by moving the locations to a
> list inside the
> > first tuple:
> >
> > bkpt={number="1", ... , locations=[{number="1.1", ...}, ...]}
>
> This seems more like an additional burden for frontends which cannot
> rely on a specific gdb version being installed as they have to keep
> code to parse both results, for years.
Although that is a good point, keeping it forces frontends to deal
with that case. I believe this invalid output was introduced with
GDB 7.5. If it was fixed, an existing or future frontend may choose
not to support the invalid output and rely on GDB 7.6. I don't know
yet what we will do in Eclipse but I know that we use GDB 7.5 now
even though we don't parse the special broken output for breakpoints.
So things are not broken enough to force us to support the invalid
output (or at least I haven't realized that they are broken :)).
> The fact that the current output might not conform to the documented
> grammar has no impact to existing frontends as they have/had to cope
> with this kind of slight deviations anyway.
>
> An alternative approach would be to just make the documentation match
> the actual output. This is not unprecedented.
>
> Andre'
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-29 20:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-29 14:36 Mircea Gherzan
2013-01-29 15:39 ` Marc Khouzam
2013-01-29 15:52 ` Mircea Gherzan
2013-01-29 16:04 ` Marc Khouzam
2013-01-29 16:26 ` Vladimir Prus
2013-01-29 19:28 ` Mircea Gherzan
2013-01-29 20:36 ` Vladimir Prus
2013-01-29 20:55 ` Mircea Gherzan
2013-01-29 19:45 ` André Pönitz
2013-01-29 20:42 ` Marc Khouzam [this message]
2013-01-29 22:14 ` André Pönitz
2013-01-30 16:27 ` Marc Khouzam
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=E59706EF8DB1D147B15BECA3322E4BDC096BF6@eusaamb103.ericsson.se \
--to=marc.khouzam@ericsson.com \
--cc=andre.poenitz@mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=mircea.gherzan@intel.com \
--cc=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=vladimir@codesourcery.com \
/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