Re: GDB/MI questions

[Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>]

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 11:15:10AM -0500, Simon Marchi wrote:
> On 2017-01-19 11:03, Bob Rossi wrote:
> >On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 10:47:21AM -0500, Simon Marchi wrote:
> >>On 2017-01-19 10:11, Bob Rossi wrote:
> >>>I'm just trying to provide the same functionality I did when I was using
> >>>annotations. This was one of the noted differences.
> >>>
> >>>Since the MI differs in this area, I've done as you suggested and
> >>>that works well. I guess I'll see if there are any downsides here.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>Bob Rossi
> >>
> >>From experience (I'd like to be proven wrong), it will be very difficult
> >>to
> >>accurately re-create the gdb console "experience" when using MI.  The
> >>commands that should or should not repeat is just one example.  Consider
> >>history, tab completion, readline bindings (e.g. ctrl-R), pagination,
> >>etc.
> >>How does that work with the MI version of cgdb?
> >
> >CGDB links to readline so the interaction is all very similar.
> 
> I'm curious how completion works currently (with annotations) for example.
> When the user presses tab, does readline call a callback that you specified
> in CGDB in order to get the completion candidates?  Then, you get that
> information from gdb and return it?  If so, how do you get it?  The
> "complete" command?
> 
> If it already works fine like that, then I guess it can work

Yes! Exactly.

...

> >I might give that a try. However, since CGDB already has great terminal
> >emulation, it's not a huge deal. The other downside is, CGDB works with
> >lots of GDB's. Using this feature leaves behind many GDBs. Or I'd have
> >to support two modes. Yuck.
> 
> You are right, that's the downside of newer stuff...

I'll have to check out this new functionality...

Thanks,
Bob Rossi