Re: GNOME::Debugger::Commander proposal

[Dave Camp <campd oit edu>]

Elliot Lee <sopwith@redhat.com> writes:

> >            Process execute (in string args);
> 
> You are probably going to want to allow passing a sequence<string> for the
> args.
Yes, that is certainly true.

> 
> >            Process attach (in short pid);
> >            Process load_corefile (in string corefile_name);
> 
> I think you have to specify an executable name for these operations.
> 
> >             /* Breakpoints */
> 
> These breakpoint operations should be on a Process, not on a Commander.
I think this needs explaining.  

First of all, one change we made since posting this, is that the Commander
object is now called Program.  A Program object represents a binary loaded
into the debugger.  So imagine this sequence:

psuedo-CORBA Calls                                   GDB interaction
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Program prog = ProgramFactory.create("foo")          ./gdb 
                                                     file foo

prog.set_breakpoint ("main")                         break main
Process proc = prog.attach (12345)                   attach 12345
--------------------------------------------------------------------

This makes debugging multithreaded apps and fork()s a bit easier to support.

> >             void set_breakpoint (in string file_name,
> >                                  in long line_num,
> >                                  in string condition);
> >             void set_breakpoint_function (in string file_name,
> >                                           in string function_name,
> >                                           in string condition);
> 
> These two should return the breakpoint #.
Most certainly.

> There is one other nitpick: only the Process::run() operation needs to
> return NotExecutable - it either doesn't make sense or is an impossible
> case for the others.
That is true. 

Thanks a lot,
-dave