This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: MI query questions
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- To: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 10:46:40 -0400
- Subject: Re: MI query questions
- References: <20060529122337.GB2021@brasko.net>
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 08:23:37AM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote:
> The first small issue is that the '[1] all\n' choice is on the same
> line as the [0] choice.
That's because the ~"" blocks come from individual calls to printf.
> The second issue is how GDB outputs a final ">" line. This isn't a valid
> GDB/MI Output record/command. At least, I don't think it is. If I select
> an option, then I get this
> Which looks pretty good to me. So the problem is, the line ">"
> apparently means to get input from the user. This isn't specified in the
> MI OUTPUT record. Should we change the OUTPUT record to represent
> interactive commands?
I don't really think we should shoehorn these queries into MI. It
would make more sense to me to have it do something MI-like. For
example, not set any breakpoint, but return a more exact list of places
the breakpoint could be placed. If you want the query behavior, you
could of course use interpreter-exec :-)
I dunno what that new response would look like, and I'm not especially
interested in working it out; just sharing my opinion. The > bit is
very un-MI, and e.g. it prevents pipelining MI commands.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery