From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19734 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2006 04:33:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 19724 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jan 2006 04:33:08 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Sun, 29 Jan 2006 04:33:07 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1F34FL-0003KU-TM; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 23:33:04 -0500 Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 23:21:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Jim Blandy Cc: Paul Schlie , gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Using XML in GDB? Message-ID: <20060129043303.GA12752@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Blandy , Paul Schlie , gdb@sourceware.org References: <8f2776cb0601282027k53f2ae04je61b4208250348f9@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8f2776cb0601282027k53f2ae04je61b4208250348f9@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00323.txt.bz2 On Sat, Jan 28, 2006 at 08:27:42PM -0800, Jim Blandy wrote: > On 1/28/06, Paul Schlie wrote: > > > From: Jim Blandy > > > I think if you're going to have structured data, something like > > > XML or ASN.1 is the way to go. (I'd actually prefer to say "lisp > > > s-expressions", but then nobody would speak to me any more. :) ) > > > > - Actually I'd have thought s-expression structured data would be a > > vastly superior choice relative either perverted (IMHO) alternative. > > S-expressions are great if you've already got a lisp interpreter > around. If GDB had Guile integrated into it, making all this work > would be so easy we'd barely bother to have a conversation about it. > But our audience is more comfortable with Python, Ruby, and Perl; I > think a syntax that is well-supported by those tools is a better > choice. > > It was a toss-off joke; I didn't mean to distract attention from > Daniel's proposal. We can have a GDB extension language discussion on > a separate thread, if people are interested. For the record, I've implemented most of Guile integration on a lark once; I wouldn't say it would make anything quite that easy, though :-) We were still lacking the bits to make extension languages useful, at the time, and somewhat still today. Once that's fixed, I anticipate sprouting Guile, Python, and updated Perl bindings all at about the same time. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery