From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28783 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2002 12:52:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 28753 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2002 12:52:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 26 Apr 2002 12:52:02 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E57B63D5C; Fri, 26 Apr 2002 08:51:58 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3CC94D6E.7080702@cygnus.com> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 05:52:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020424 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: jingham@apple.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Questions about GDB-MI Interface` References: <6480-Fri26Apr2002105439+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00459.txt.bz2 > Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 12:23:17 -0700 >> From: Jim Ingham >> >> So, we added an "-mi-interpreter-exec" command that runs commands as if it >> were the console interpreter. The syntax is: >> >> mi-interpreter-exec console ... >> >> These will feed the commands one by one to the execute_command function, AND >> switch the output printer to the CLI printer, so you see console style >> output. Also, while the CLI command is running, it puts in place a series >> of hooks that will report back interesting things to the GUI. > > > Isn't it better to have the CLI-style output be followed by the > MI-style output, with some clear separator between them? The front > end could then filter the CLI output to the display, while keeping > the MI output for itself, to sync itself with the debugger. I suspect the details would be like this. There would also be a bit of pragmatism though. To do this ``right'', GDB needs control over all output. That in turn means eliminating all those remaining printf's. Hmm, Pierre is quietly doing this! enjoy, Andrew