From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14101 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2007 22:39:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 14087 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2007 22:39:36 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (66.249.92.172) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Jan 2007 22:39:31 +0000 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 75so8440552ugb for ; Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:39:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.107.15 with SMTP id f15mr2786015buc.1168295968174; Mon, 08 Jan 2007 14:39:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.191.16 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Jan 2007 14:39:28 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 22:39:00 -0000 From: "Kip Macy" To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GDB and scripting languages - which In-Reply-To: <20070108222005.GA27451@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070108222005.GA27451@nevyn.them.org> 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: 2007-01/txt/msg00128.txt.bz2 > Accordingly, I am inclined to use multiple bindings, to include at > least Python and GUILE. My current design relies on GDB/MI for most > control of GDB; I might put the MI parser on the C side of the > interface to allow MI results to be easily converted to lists / tuples > / et cetera in each supported language, but other than that it > would be a fairly thin interface on top of MI. > > (MI isn't the most convenient interface for scripting - I'm still > trying to figure out how it will interact with GDB's value objects, but > it will probably build on top of varobj to do so. The symmetry is > nice; what you can do in scripts you ought to be able to do in a > GUI front end to GDB too so any MI extensions useful for one > are likely useful to the other. However, this is the subject of > a later discussion, not this one.) This is what I did to add perl support and it worked fairly well. Some work will be needed to handle exceptions gracefully on the scripting library side. I prefer python too. However, I think it is more important that there be *a* scripting language than that it be the "right" one. Getting bogged down in bike-shedding is counter to everyone's interests. -Kip