Re: GDB Console

[Tom Tromey <tromey redhat com>]

>>>>> "Dodji" == Dodji Seketeli <dodji-fIDRvF7C5exg9hUCZPvPmw public gmane org> writes:

Dodji> The way I see things is that the Nemiver CLI will be different from the
Dodji> GDB CLI anyway.  For instance, it seems to me that it's of little
Dodji> relevance to have the exact GDB "list" command, when you can otherwise
Dodji> read the source code in a graphical way today already.

True; there is some useless-to-the-GUI stuff in gdb.
I don't think this describes most commands.  Maybe it doesn't even
describe *any* -- maybe sometimes the user just wants to run list and
see a few lines there in the console.

Ok, I can't actually imagine wanting this myself.  But then there is
another option: let's modify gdb to let the GUI hook into these things.

Dodji> On the other hand, some users have asked for commands that would, for
Dodji> instance, make Nemiver find the source code for a given symbol and
Dodji> scroll appropriately to let the user read the code of that function.  I
Dodji> guess this would need some work outside of GDB (in Nemiver) to
Dodji> implement.

gdb has the little-used "edit" command.
Before launching, nemiver could set $EDITOR to a program that contacts
nemiver (or, cough cough, just prints stuff to stdout in MI format).
Then the user could just "edit function"...

Dodji> And there will a corpus of obvious commands like next, step etc, for
Dodji> which I see little value in naming differently from GDB.  For instance,
Dodji> the equivalent commands in other debuggers like JDB or the python/perl
Dodji> debuggers are quite similar to those that can be found in GDB.

Yeah.  But we're going to be changing some of these... e.g., with the
coming "frame filters" work, "bt" is going to need more arguments, maybe
even "up" will.

Dodji> From a pure implementation point of view, I think that if we write the
Dodji> Nemiver CLI in terms of the IDebugger interface, we still have the
Dodji> choice to just implement particular commands as pure GDB CLI pass
Dodji> through, rather than using MI.  We have done this in the past, and we
Dodji> still do this for some commands.  In other words, using GDB/CLI or
Dodji> GDB/MI is a choice we can make on a case by case basis.  And it seems
Dodji> interesting to me to keep that possibility to choose.

Ok, I see.

Tom