This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [8/9] multiple locations


 >...
 > > OK, but it looks much a smaller/simpler patch than the one you've already
 > > committed.
 > 
 > Yes, but I have better luck getting huge patches approved, than for 
 > obvious patches, for whatever reasons.
 > 
 > Basically, it boils down to:
 > 1. Using <PENDING> like above seems a good idea to try.
 > 2. There's a bit of time involved
 > 3. I'm short of time, and probably won't spend it until all the
 > patches I've sent already are reviewed ;-)

There's no hurry.  It could be added to the Wiki as a TODO item for
GDB 6.8 Release.

  Joel,

  Can I do that just by creating an account?  Shall I delete the GDB 6.7
  Release page too?

 > > Also MI is still evolving.  It's interesting that you suggest all
 > > frontends should use it as the changes you have just made for breakpoints
 > > with multiple locations appear in the output of "info breakpoints" but not
 > > in that of "-break-list".  So I don't see how any front end could handle
 > > this information through MI.

 > Heh, you probably know what's going on here yourself. Even though MI was
 > advertised as the right interface for frontend for some years, it does not
 > have a maintainer, or a particular development plan, and misses some bits.
 > And probably the only way to change the situation is to decide that MI is
 > the future, and actively discourage use of CLI for anything, to the degree
 > of immediately refusing any request mentioning CLI in relation to any
 > frontend.

I don't know why you insist on being so confrontational, or how the above lack
of support for MI is solved in any way by refusing requests for CLI, but I find
it quite unhelpful.

 > As for multiple breakpoints -- I would have being happy to provide MI
 > interface, and not provide CLI at all -- but I doubt that would have being
 > acceptable, and MI has fallen out. Again, a policy that new advanced
 > functionality is allowed to be available via MI only might have helped.

Presumably CLI is still needed by those who use GDB from the command line.
Or are you proposing to `help' them by forcing them to use a frontend?

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]