RE: Changing "info frame" output?

RE: Changing "info frame" output?

[Nick Roberts]

> and with that in mind have come up with the following as a draft:

> Stack level 1, frame at 0x7ffff240:
>  Code at 0x1005e5f8 in fprintf_filtered (stream=0x10467888,
>     format=0x10371b74 "GNU gdb %s\n")
>     at /home/scratch/PENDING/2004-10-29-full-location/src/gdb/utils.c:2231
>  called by frame at 0x7ffff260, caller of frame at 0x7ffff1c0
>  Source language c.
>  Frame base at 0x7ffff1c0.
>  Registers saved by this frame:
>     pc at 0x7ffff244, lr at 0x7ffff244

...
> thoughts,

Well gdb-ui.el in CVS Emacs uses the existing info frame" output to update the
GUI. If you are going to change this output then I think it is important to
have an equivalent MI command whose output is stable. I started a thread about
this on the gdb mailing list back in June, and posted a patch, probably lousy,
on gdb-patches:

     http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2004-06/msg00652.html

to describe the functionality I was hoping to have and which was titled:

    [RFC] (was Re: How does GDB/MI give the current frame).

Could this be included in the discussion too, please.


Nick


Update on Emacs: We're six months into the feature freeze and there still
hasn't been a pretest. Emacs is starting to look like one of those immaculate
classic cars that goes everywhere on a trailer. Well you wouldn't want to
get it dirty, would you?

Re: Changing "info frame" output?

[Andrew Cagney]

Nick Roberts wrote:
> 
>>and with that in mind have come up with the following as a draft:
> 
> 
>>Stack level 1, frame at 0x7ffff240:
>> Code at 0x1005e5f8 in fprintf_filtered (stream=0x10467888,
>>    format=0x10371b74 "GNU gdb %s\n")
>>    at /home/scratch/PENDING/2004-10-29-full-location/src/gdb/utils.c:2231
>> called by frame at 0x7ffff260, caller of frame at 0x7ffff1c0
>> Source language c.
>> Frame base at 0x7ffff1c0.
>> Registers saved by this frame:
>>    pc at 0x7ffff244, lr at 0x7ffff244
> 
> 
> ...
> 
>>thoughts,
> 
> 
> Well gdb-ui.el in CVS Emacs uses the existing info frame" output to update the
> GUI. If you are going to change this output then I think it is important to
> have an equivalent MI command whose output  is stable. I started a thread about
> this on the gdb mailing list back in June, and posted a patch, probably lousy,
> on gdb-patches:

What exactly does EMACS use?  Sigh!

>      http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2004-06/msg00652.html
> 
> to describe the functionality I was hoping to have and which was titled:
> 
>     [RFC] (was Re: How does GDB/MI give the current frame).
> 
> Could this be included in the discussion too, please.

Start a new thread (I don't know why I missed it).  My only memory in 
this area is that there needs to be both a light-weight and heavy weight 
frame info call (info frame is heavy weight - it forces a full frame 
unwind).

Andrew

How can GDB/MI give the current frame (was Re: Changing "info frame" output?)

[Nick Roberts]

> What exactly does EMACS use?  Sigh!

Very little. Just the address, procedure name, filename and line no. (if
available). I used the command "frame" initially, but its output wasn't as
consistent.

 > Start a new thread (I don't know why I missed it).  My only memory in 
 > this area is that there needs to be both a light-weight and heavy weight 
 > frame info call (info frame is heavy weight - it forces a full frame 
 > unwind).

It sounds like all I would need is the lightweight call via MI. I called `my
command' "-stack-info-frame", after looking at the GDB manual, and out of
ignorance. "-stack-frame" might be more appropriate.

Nick