From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10742 invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2007 22:07:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 10723 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Feb 2007 22:07:21 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:07:16 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9601148CCB2 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:07:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 02767-01-7 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:07:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (nile.gnat.com [205.232.38.5]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 638CC48CBC2 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:07:14 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <45D0E513.1010805@adacore.com> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:07:00 -0000 From: Robert Dewar User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB and scripting languages - which References: <20070108222005.GA27451@nevyn.them.org> <20070210203307.GA27502@nevyn.them.org> <45D0DF34.2090405@adacore.com> <20070212215038.GA23368@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20070212215038.GA23368@caradoc.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-02/txt/msg00093.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > By the way, if it weren't for this concern, I think I'd (slightly) > prefer Lua. It would probably be a little easier to embed and lower > footprint. But I think it would be overall less useful. Right, please do not consider my comment to in any way be a technical judgment on the language merits or suitability for purpose from a technical point of view, it is not!