From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5615 invoked by alias); 3 Mar 2003 19:09:00 -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 5599 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2003 19:09:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (172.16.49.200) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 3 Mar 2003 19:09:00 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0C3E2A9C; Mon, 3 Mar 2003 14:08:58 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3E63A84A.4030407@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 19:09:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Roberts Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: GDB/MI revisited References: <15940.5214.123419.414411@nick.uklinux.net> <3E5CEA03.2070007@redhat.com> <15967.54551.724257.774642@nick.uklinux.net> <3E616E6D.1080908@redhat.com> <15970.39290.513649.825076@nick.uklinux.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00056.txt.bz2 > > > > I would prefer this approach too since the GUD buffer would then allow > > > completion. However, without level 2 annotations, the CLI is useless to the > > > lisp package that I have written, so I don't see how an incremental migration > > > is possible. > > > > Why exactly is it useless? Using both [deprecated] level 2 annotations > > and "interpreter mi ..." simultaneously. > > Ah! I follow you now. Does this mean that you would like to incrementally > obsolete annotations? This relates to something that I said earlier: There is always room for both compromize and reality :-) > If this is the case, I *think* I could modify gdb-ui.el not to use the > annotation breakpoints-invalid quite easily. I don't know what other users > of level 2 annotations, e.g the authors of cgdb, would think, though. What about defining `level three' annotations as the event stuff from level two but with all the breakpoint et.al. markups removed? Having the CLI generate event annotations is hardly different to having MI generate it's event messages. Andrew