Re: Registering pretty-printers

[Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>]

On Saturday 27 June 2009 Tom Tromey wrote:

> Vladimir> There are two important points I propose:
> Vladimir> 1. Having a file at top-level, as opposed in some subdir which name
> Vladimir> differs.
> Vladimir> 2. Having a file with fixed name. 
> Vladimir> I am probably wrong, but neither of this is true with the current
> Vladimir> recommended approach.
> 
> Tom> Yeah.  But isn't this just a matter of documenting "this is how we
> Tom> recommend you distribute stand-alone printers"?
> 
> I have been thinking more about this problem.  I am now wondering if
> we could have a solution based on Python Eggs.  Background reading:
> 
> http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/PythonEggs
> 
> My rough idea would be that a suite of pretty-printers would be
> packaged as an Egg.  We would define a specific resource which would
> name the registration function.
> 
> Hook files could continue to work more or less as they do now.
> 
> An IDE could upload Python code to gdb to invoke the registration
> function manually.
> 
> I haven't tried to experiment with this, but based on my reading so
> far, it seems like it ought to work.  What do you think?

I did not tried either, nor did I worked through design, but it looks like
python eggs is the de-facto standard way to publish anything python and
should work.

- Volodya