From: Bob Rossi <bob_rossi@cox.net>
To: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: CLI commands in MI
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 10:46:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060511103132.GD3727@brasko.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17506.54099.147732.205664@farnswood.snap.net.nz>
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 06:01:55PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote:
> Bob Rossi writes:
> > I'm thinking it would be a good idea to remove the ability to enter CLI
> > commands into the MI interpreter. Does anyone disagree?
>
> Yes. I find it very convenient to see whats going on. To get to a given
> execution state its easier type the CLI command directly, rather than the MI
> one which is generally longer and doesn't allow abbreviations, or prefix
> everything with -interpreter-exec.
OK, well maybe if someone types a CLI command, internally we make it do
the same thing -interpreter-exec console ... does? That would still make
me happy. Although I read below you said that's the case. Either it's
not the case, or it is and my GDB is old. I'll have to investigate.
> > I think the only thing it can cause is confusion. Especially since
> > entering the '-exec-run' command gives different results than the
> > '-interpreter-exec console "r"' command which gives different results
> > than the 'r' command.
>
> I don't how you can say that as directly entered CLI commands now (implicitly)
> use -interpreter-exec console. AFAICS the only difference is the extra &"r\n".
Hmmm, that's not the case for me. Is this becase I'm using an older
version of GDB?
$ gdb --version
GNU gdb 6.3-debian
(gdb)
b main
&"b main\n"
^done
(gdb)
r
&"r\n"
^done,reason="breakpoint-hit",bkptno="1",thread-id="0",frame={addr="0x08048364",func="main",args=[{name="argc",value="1"},{name="argv",value="0xbf9d1464"}],file="main.c",line="4"}
(gdb)
(gdb)
-interpreter-exec console "b main"
~"Breakpoint 1 at 0x8048364: file main.c, line 4.\n"
^done
(gdb)
-interpreter-exec console "r"
~"Starting program: /home/bob/cvs/gdbmi/builddir/src/main \n"
~"\n"
~"Breakpoint 1, main (argc=1, argv=0xbfbcd7a4) at main.c:4\n"
~"4\t argc = 1;\n"
^done
(gdb)
> > Now that -interpreter-exec is available, is there any reason beyond
> > trying to confuse us all that console commands are allowed?
>
> No one is forcing you to use it. Why would you want to force others not
> to use it?
Because it's a totally useless feature that gives incorrect results.
Also, FE's might actually use it!
Bob Rossi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-11 10:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-11 3:39 Bob Rossi
2006-05-11 6:08 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2006-05-11 10:24 ` Joel Brobecker
2006-05-11 12:46 ` Nick Roberts
2006-05-11 10:40 ` Bob Rossi
2006-05-11 10:57 ` Nick Roberts
2006-05-11 11:24 ` Bob Rossi
2006-05-11 19:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2006-05-11 20:57 ` Bob Rossi
2006-05-11 6:39 ` Nick Roberts
2006-05-11 10:46 ` Bob Rossi [this message]
2006-05-11 10:48 ` Nick Roberts
2006-05-11 10:54 ` Bob Rossi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060511103132.GD3727@brasko.net \
--to=bob_rossi@cox.net \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=nickrob@snap.net.nz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox