From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5491 invoked by alias); 26 Aug 2002 20:09:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 5478 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2002 20:09:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO valrhona.uglyboxes.com) (64.1.192.220) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Aug 2002 20:09:19 -0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (IDENT:nb1tCjvZjNJRgxwD9S6HJYYtNvl/D4Pr@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by valrhona.uglyboxes.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7QKBiY11020 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 13:11:57 -0700 Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 13:13:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz X-X-Sender: keiths@valrhona.uglyboxes.com To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] gdb-events.sh: selected-frame-level-changed event In-Reply-To: <3D6A87B9.70607@ges.redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00862.txt.bz2 On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote: > BTW, like any MI change, documentation and a testcase are also needed. It doesn't change MI. CVS head MI doesn't even use events. Right now, the only official user is Insight (which reminds me, I have yet to check in changes for Insight to deal with these new events!). I have patches in the interpreter branch which will change MI to using gdb-events, and I have the corresponding documentation there, as well. Just waiting for review of interps.[ch] to get this all going. > GDB doesn't issue a target-stop event because it isn't possible to go > back to GDB and ask it why it stopped. The stop message is generated on > the fly --- known bug in current implementation :-( Yeah, but it's close enough! :-) > We need to be careful though. Otherwize GDB will be locked into > supporting something broken for the next N years :-( I think that we can be a little finnicky about this. While UIs written on top of MI may like it if we never change anything for a very long time, well, I don't think we need to feel that we have any obligation to carry around legacy code like this. We've certainly never heard from anyone but Apple (and I guess Mo is doing something with MI), and Apple is certainly capable of dealing with these changes. :-) Besides people will get little sympathy from me. Just look at the history of how some of the most innocent gdb changes have completely broken Insight! :-) Seriously, though, I applaud your chivalry on this subject, but interfaces develop and "libraries" change. We're no different than, eg. readline, and how often have we updated gdb to use the latest readline? Keith