From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31122 invoked by alias); 24 Sep 2004 22:43:04 -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 31094 invoked from network); 24 Sep 2004 22:42:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 24 Sep 2004 22:42:58 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8OMgvEO029059 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:42:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8OMgsr01963; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:42:54 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9737328D2; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:40:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4154A265.6090607@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 22:43:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040831 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bob Rossi Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: MI changes References: <20040923123307.GA989@white> In-Reply-To: <20040923123307.GA989@white> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00226.txt.bz2 > Hi, > > Could I please have a response to this topic? I am being held up on the > development of my project while waiting for this decision. I think others have already responded to this proposal with a clear rationale for not making a change. We've already got numeric prefixes which are returned with the command result. Asynchronous output has to be self contained. Andrew > I propose several changes to MI. > > 1. Every MI output command is prefixed with a label saying what type > of command it is. This is easy for synchronous commands. We will have > to make a list of asynchronous MI output commands that can be > documented some where. > > benefit: the front end knows how to deal with the data it was > given in all circumstances > > 2. Because of this new label, all MI output commands of it's type > will be backwards compatible. Only adding fields and such things are > allowed. If it is necessary to change the command, a new MI command > and label will be put in it's place. > > benefit: front ends will be very reliable because they will work > with new and old GDB's. They will also work with snapshot of GDB > instead of only major releases. > > BTW, this Email does not address MI input commands in any way. This will > be the next step on my list. > > Thanks, > Bob Rossi >