Re: [RFC] plugin/extension interface

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 03:07:29PM -0800, Jim Blandy wrote:
> I don't think you're seeing the potential here.  There are a *lot* of
> things people would like to do with debuggers:

And every one of these things you've described doing with debuggers,
would require a _DIFFERENT_ plugin interface.  It would be a nightmare
to add this to today's GDB!

See Bob's comment for the right way to handle this problem, in my
opinion also.  I consider all this part of the "front end".  Most of
these things shouldn't be added to GDB at such a level that it gets
exposed through MI; you should add it to your front end in a front end
specific fashion.

Often this means you need to add it to the GDB CLI also.  That's a
different sort of problem.  Scripting languages, rather than plugin
interfaces, are more viable for this.

All this, of course, is moot until someone begins to implement it.
But I have yet to see a binary plugin interface that doesn't have all
the problems Mark described.

> ... Okay, another qualification is that a well-integrated scripting
> language might do everything I'm saying here, and better, because the
> extension/core interface is more well-defined.

Yes.

I believe this will be the thing that pushes us up to version 7.  I
hope it will be soon, time and volunteers permitting.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC