From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29164 invoked by alias); 20 Jul 2007 19:37:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 29156 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Jul 2007 19:37:19 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Jul 2007 19:37:18 +0000 Received: (qmail 12672 invoked from network); 20 Jul 2007 19:37:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (jimb@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 20 Jul 2007 19:37:16 -0000 To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow printing of Guile values References: <87ir8f2lrh.fsf@chbouib.org> <20070720152952.GB9407@caradoc.them.org> <87zm1ryspn.fsf@chbouib.org> <871wf3x7er.fsf@chbouib.org> From: Jim Blandy Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:12:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <871wf3x7er.fsf@chbouib.org> (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:21:48 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 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: 2007-07/txt/msg00241.txt.bz2 ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > Jim Blandy writes: > >> Definitely. Part of the rationale for deleting it was, "Oh, if >> someone shows up to keep it alive, we've still got it in CVS." I'll >> be happy to review changes. The key is that someone make themselves >> available to keep it working. > > Great. > >> A debugger should be able to inspect the state of programs in serious >> disarray, so there's an argument against relying too much on invoking >> functions in Guile. Certainly, though, the best code would draw a >> clear distinction between scm-lang.c and scm-lang-guile.c. > > Agreed. However, to be very pragmatic, we may be better off with > minimal support that works and doesn't add a significant maintenance > burden. For instance, while valuable, interpretation of Guile values on > the GDB side requires a significant amount of code that must be kept in > sync with Guile. > > How would you like to proceed: would you like to reinstall the deleted > files and patch against them, or would you prefer that we somehow start > anew? Let's take the files you've got now and just put them in.