Re: RFC: add ability to "source" Python code

Thiago Jung Bauermann
2009-02-12T20:26:55Z

El miÃ©, 11-02-2009 a las 22:26 -0800, Joel Brobecker escribiÃ³:
> > > I could return the "heck of exaggeration" back by saying that we're only
> > > talking about the highly improbably GDB scripts whose name uses a standard
> > > Python extension.
> >
> > Yes, but I didn't say that makes the feature "much less useful". I
> > just said that I didn't like the incompatibility.
>
> I did mean what I said, and I don't think it's an exageration.
> Otherwise, I wouldn't be even arguing about it. I am OK with you
> not agreeing with that judgement, but you do make it sound like
> I'm obviously wrong. I cannot be that obvious, given the number of
> people who expressed their opinion in favor of this feature, vs
> the number of people against.

For the record, I agree with Joel in that not recognizing .py makes the
feature much less useful.

> Anyway, how about a compromise, then, and require the -p switch to
> source python scripts? The incompatibility is that
>
> (gdb) source -p foo
>
> would no longer work for file "-p foo". I think that's an acceptable
> "incompatibilty". Would you agree?

+1
--
[]'s
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center