From: Jan Vrany via Gdb <gdb@sourceware.org>
To: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>, Matt Rice <ratmice@gmail.com>
Cc: Basile Starynkevitch <basile@starynkevitch.net>,
gdb@sourceware.org, team@refpersys.org
Subject: Re: GDB variants accepting plugins (to the debugger) ?
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2026 13:49:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9de8b2c7cd7746b1de68ac4bfb629e33fbd38cb6.camel@vrany.io> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877bsxzpie.fsf@tromey.com>
On Sat, 2026-01-31 at 10:00 -0700, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > > > > > "Matt" == Matt Rice <ratmice@gmail.com> writes:
>
> Matt> Anyhow I would be/have been somewhat interesting in putting in
> Matt> time/effort into working on this sort of building out wasm inspired by
> Matt> parts of the python API, but it feels like you'd probably want to put
> Matt> a big experimental sticker on it in the sense that it could end up
> Matt> with some component-model upstream change which in theory may mean
> Matt> that the bytecode compiled pretty printer may be tied to a particular
> Matt> version gdb using whatever version of the component model. In the same
> Matt> sense that we currently rely on a python version (with the difference
> Matt> being that python is much longer history of stabilization than the
> Matt> component model which)
>
> Matt> So in my opinion there is a little more to it than just putting in the
> Matt> work, there is a lot less prior art than python modules.
> Matt> Perhaps it would be best to start out with configure option not
> Matt> enabled by default, with the understanding that it is currently
> Matt> experimental.
> Matt> something like --enable-experimental-wasm-plugins or some such.
> Matt> Anyhow I would be excited to play around with it some if there was a
> Matt> roadmap for how we want to handle these issues...
>
> FWIW another idea in this space is the LLDB bytecode
>
> https://lldb.llvm.org/resources/formatterbytecode.html
>
> That page makes it sound like the plan is to have the compiler emit this
> bytecode, but I haven't really paid attention to see if that's happened.
>
> I wonder if it would be possible to implement any of these without
> really touching the gdb core. That is, some Python shims that load wasm
> or whatever and do what is needed.
>
>
I do not see why not - a Python API to access sections and/or minsymbols
might be needed though. I've done something similar in the past, including
the section/minsymbol API (but never got to polish it an submit :-(
Jan
> Tom
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-02 13:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-30 13:13 Basile Starynkevitch
2026-01-30 13:33 ` Eli Zaretskii via Gdb
2026-01-30 15:35 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb
2026-01-30 17:03 ` Basile Starynkevitch
2026-01-30 17:16 ` Simon Marchi via Gdb
2026-01-30 20:12 ` Tom Tromey
2026-01-31 2:36 ` Matt Rice via Gdb
2026-01-31 17:00 ` Tom Tromey
2026-02-02 13:49 ` Jan Vrany via Gdb [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9de8b2c7cd7746b1de68ac4bfb629e33fbd38cb6.camel@vrany.io \
--to=gdb@sourceware.org \
--cc=basile@starynkevitch.net \
--cc=jan@vrany.io \
--cc=ratmice@gmail.com \
--cc=team@refpersys.org \
--cc=tom@tromey.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox