From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15191 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2004 16:42:46 -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 15150 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2004 16:42:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pluton.ispras.ru) (83.149.199.253) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 8 Dec 2004 16:42:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 43067 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2004 16:41:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO truba.ispras.ru) (83.149.198.41) by pluton.ispras.ru with SMTP; 8 Dec 2004 16:41:46 -0000 Received: from truba.ispras.ru (root@localhost) by truba.ispras.ru (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id iB8GcYT9015907 for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:38:34 +0300 Received: from ispserv.ispras.ru (ispserv [83.149.198.72]) by truba.ispras.ru (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iB8GcY8s015897; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:38:34 +0300 Received: from kite.ispras.ru (kite.ispras.ru [83.149.198.52]) by ispserv.ispras.ru (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id iB8GgCDA027864; Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:42:12 +0300 Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 16:42:00 -0000 From: Konstantin Karganov Reply-To: Konstantin Karganov Organization: ISP RAS Message-ID: <9825395456.20041208194459@ispras.ru> To: Eli Zaretskii CC: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re[2]: complete GDB MI specification In-reply-To: <01c4dc95$Blat.v2.2.2$0f2f1c40@zahav.net.il> References: <3616850089.20041129165854@ispras.ru> <41AB43C8.7050500@gnu.org> <13730878711.20041129205245@ispras.ru> <18220744048.20041206192130@ispras.ru> <01c4dbd6$Blat.v2.2.2$0b225460@zahav.net.il> <429477215.20041207214436@ispras.ru> <01c4dc95$Blat.v2.2.2$0f2f1c40@zahav.net.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SpamTest-Version: SMTP-Filter Version 2.0.0 [0125], KAS/Release SMTP-Filter Version 2.0.0 [0125], KAS/Release X-Spamtest-Info: Pass through X-SW-Source: 2004-12/txt/msg00054.txt.bz2 Hello Eli, >(And I'm not sure such a description should be in the manual, anyway.) As for me, I think it should be in UG since it is a way to use GDB. Maybe in appendix or some "advanced" chapter. > Sorry, I thought a grammar was posted, but perhaps I was mistaken. There was posted a refined grammar transformed to LL(1) kind, but that's not exactly what is needed... > If an example is clear and tells enough to explain what to expect, > then it's fine by me. It's fine to illustrate the point or get the main idea, but do not suffice for writing a code that will use it automatically. The text-based protocol for the debugger that we implemented 2 years ago had _much_ more rigorous and complete specification. > If you find incorrect or misleading examples, please point them out, > and please tell what is misleading about them. Oh, BTW, I've got one :) Section 24.9 (GDB/MI Program control), subsection "The -exec-interrupt command". The specified behavior doesn't reproduce since the -exec-continue and other stepping commands are not asynchronous (though the doc states they are). > But basically, I think that once the Yacc parser is written and > becomes part of GDB, we should maintain the parser instead of > documenting the grammar. Yes, I've also got this idea - it's better not to develop parsers every time from the scratch, but to have a "standard" parser since it fits the main goal of the MI interface project. In this case it can be easily made consistent with current MI version (as supported by the same team). Anyhow, the detailed semantics description of the parser output should be available, here I completely disagree with the position "maintain instead of documenting" (literally, as it was mentioned). One more question about this parser as a part of GDB - does it exist and will be available or it's still a far distant project? -- Best regards, Konstantin