From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-24927-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 25206 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2006 07:14:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 25194 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Apr 2006 07:14:42 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from romy.inter.net.il (HELO romy.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.66)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 15 Apr 2006 07:14:40 +0000
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-83-130-211-86.inter.net.il [83.130.211.86]) 	by romy.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3-GA) 	with ESMTP id DZF35858 (AUTH halo1); 	Sat, 15 Apr 2006 10:14:26 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 15:07:00 -0000
Message-Id: <u1wvz1fam.fsf@gnu.org>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: "Jim Blandy" <jimb@red-bean.com>
CC: ghost@cs.msu.su, gdb@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <8f2776cb0604141518g19e09431i404dccbe77262175@mail.gmail.com> 	(jimb@red-bean.com)
Subject: Re: printing wchar_t*
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
References: <e1lsqg$aml$1@sea.gmane.org> <200604141257.41690.ghost@cs.msu.su> 	 <uu08w1cnf.fsf@gnu.org> <200604141837.26618.ghost@cs.msu.su> 	 <uirpc19u8.fsf@gnu.org> 	 <8f2776cb0604141053v73e512e3o2d1c9086312316bd@mail.gmail.com> 	 <ubqv4108c.fsf@gnu.org> 	 <8f2776cb0604141216m216ba87ch529180cd079ce971@mail.gmail.com> 	 <20060414202720.GA23182@nevyn.them.org> 	 <8f2776cb0604141518g19e09431i404dccbe77262175@mail.gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2006-04/txt/msg00215.txt.bz2

> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:18:50 -0700
> From: "Jim Blandy" <jimb@red-bean.com>
> 
> As far as conveying strings accurately to GUI's via MI is concerned:
> 
> It's fine to improve the way MI conveys data to the front end.  It
> seems to me we still need to do things like repetition elimination and
> length limiting, but that syntax should certainly be designed to make
> the front ends' life easier.

Do you agree that the array@@ feature suggested by Daniel is a step in
the right direction?

> I'm not so sure about GDB doing character set conversion.  I think I'd
> rather see GDB concentrate on accurately and safely conveying target
> code points to the front end, and make the front end responsible for
> displaying it.

I'd rather see GDB offering something in this area as well, but until
we have a volunteer for this job, this disagreement is academic.