From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27717 invoked by alias); 18 Apr 2014 19:27:26 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 27702 invoked by uid 89); 18 Apr 2014 19:27:26 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mailuogwdur.emc.com Received: from mailuogwdur.emc.com (HELO mailuogwdur.emc.com) (128.221.224.79) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 19:27:24 +0000 Received: from maildlpprd52.lss.emc.com (maildlpprd52.lss.emc.com [10.106.48.156]) by mailuogwprd54.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id s3IJRLGn031209 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 15:27:21 -0400 X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd54.lss.emc.com s3IJRLGn031209 X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd54.lss.emc.com s3IJRLGn031209 Received: from mailusrhubprd51.lss.emc.com (mailusrhubprd51.lss.emc.com [10.106.48.24]) by maildlpprd52.lss.emc.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 15:27:04 -0400 Received: from mxhub39.corp.emc.com (mxhub39.corp.emc.com [128.222.70.106]) by mailusrhubprd51.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id s3IJR4Sr018643 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 15:27:04 -0400 Received: from mx23a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.143]) by mxhub39.corp.emc.com ([128.222.70.106]) with mapi; Fri, 18 Apr 2014 15:26:31 -0400 From: "Terekhov, Mikhail" To: "gdb@sourceware.org" Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 20:39:00 -0000 Subject: RE: MI async status output Message-ID: <84F432E8540221418FB3B2A59999A3610A3B6F6348@MX23A.corp.emc.com> References: <20140409210803.GA3166@linux> <5346B226.40209@cs.msu.su> <20140410201259.GA15060@linux> <5347BD84.5030200@broadcom.com> <20140412002538.GA27657@linux> <5350E049.9070705@codesourcery.com> <20140418104619.GA26892@linux> <53512470.8080305@codesourcery.com> <20140418163002.GA29631@linux> <535155F9.3030405@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <535155F9.3030405@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Sentrion-Hostname: mailusrhubprd51.lss.emc.com X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg00064.txt.bz2 > -----Original Message----- > From: gdb-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-owner@sourceware.org] On > Behalf Of Vladimir Prus > Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 12:43 PM > To: Bob Rossi > Cc: Andrew Burgess; gdb@sourceware.org > Subject: Re: MI async status output >=20 > On 18.04.2014 20:30, Bob Rossi wrote: > > > > The solution to these problems is pretty clear, lets give developers an= API. >=20 > I am not sure what's different between "API" and GDB/MI, which is also an > API or some sort. No matter what a new API might be, the problems of GDB > changes and supporting multiple versions of GDB will be the same, except = for > wrong grammar. Web developers have the same problems with API changes, > for all I know. >=20 The difference is very important - in case of grammar the only way to verif= y that GDB really follows it is to write and maintain complete set of test cases while= in case of API compiler will do it for you automatically. The situation with MI clearly sh= ows that and JSON will be no different in this regard. That doesn't mean that there is n= o need to verify that this API works correctly of course :} Regards, Mikhail