Re: obsoleting annotate level 2

[Peter Kovacs <peter@kovax.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1739 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:34:31AM -0500, Elena Zannoni wrote:
> If you have to keep supporting the old gdb, you will need to support
> two interfaces to gdb. Unless you are importing MI into
> 4.17.gnat.3.14p-1. If you have no control over 4.17.gnat.3.14p-1, and
> supporting that is your primary goal, I don't see what FSF gdb can do
> to correct that, ie I see two conflicting goals here.

Yes, we will continue to support --annotate=2 as well as the MI
interface.  I'm not sure why you see 2 conflicting goals.  Both
interfaces can be supported with no problems, after all we're not
interested in embedding our code into gdb itself.

>  > As for the MI issues, I think we'd be willing to move over to the MI
>  > interface if and when it supports some of the readline style of input.
> 
> About readline, there was a conscious design decision to not provide
> it with MI, because the editing capabilities would be implemented at a
> different level, in the GUI console, not in gdb. With the interpreter
> changes the console becomes now a concrete possibility.  BTW, you may
> want to take a look at Apple's Project Builder, I don't know what
> level of editing they provided with their console.

I'm not sure I understand this.  How can the stand-alone GUI query gdb
for a list of symbol names?  For example, I type break m<tab>, and it
completes to "main".

Unfortunately I don't have access to Apple's Project Builder.  Do they
offer the source to their debugger?

gdb's console is already quite capable, and many people are extremely
familiar with it.  I think it would be a shame if we have to completely
reimplement a console front-end to gdb.

- Peter

-- 
Peter D. Kovacs <peter@kovax.org>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]