From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6732 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2008 04:49:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 6723 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Sep 2008 04:49:23 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 04:48:44 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1KiimM-0002C0-IF for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 04:48:38 +0000 Received: from 201.82.215.197 ([201.82.215.197]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 04:48:38 +0000 Received: from bauerman by 201.82.215.197 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 04:48:38 +0000 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com From: Thiago Jung Bauermann Subject: Re: [rfc] expose gdb values to python Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 04:49:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <1221199426.24580.26.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit User-Agent: KNode/0.10.9 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: 2008-09/txt/msg00497.txt.bz2 Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Thiago" == Thiago Jung Bauermann writes: > There are some tradeoffs here. The "invisible access" approach is > convenient. However, it runs into issues with odd programs -- say, > multiple inheritance where a given name refers to multiple fields. Adding a way to do casting in python solves this, right? > I tend to like something toward the raw side, partly because any > cooked approach will still need some second way to deal with the > underlying explicit types. Sorry, I didn't understand "deal with the underlying explicit types". > I propose we decide these questions and implement this before checking > in this patch. The semantics of Value are critical. Right. I suggest people to take a look at the testcase to see what the syntax looks like, and speak up if there are any concerns or preferences. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center