From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28881 invoked by alias); 11 Jul 2008 23:11:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 28869 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jul 2008 23:11:01 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from agminet01.oracle.com (HELO agminet01.oracle.com) (141.146.126.228) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:10:40 +0000 Received: from agmgw1.us.oracle.com (agmgw1.us.oracle.com [152.68.180.212]) by agminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id m6BNA3i9011006; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:10:03 -0500 Received: from acsmt354.oracle.com (acsmt354.oracle.com [141.146.40.154]) by agmgw1.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.0/Switch-3.2.0) with ESMTP id m6BFSGrQ023582; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:04:58 -0600 Received: from alchar.org by acsmt359.oracle.com with ESMTP id 10782818281215817481; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:04:41 -0500 Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:11:00 -0000 From: Kris Van Hees To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Tom Tromey , Frysk List Subject: Re: Roadmap beginnings Message-ID: <20080711230440.GE5625@oracle.com> References: <20080711205531.GA15721@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080711205531.GA15721@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact frysk-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: frysk-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-q3/txt/msg00029.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 10:55:31PM +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > Hi, > > while IMO definitely not much important right now but > > On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 21:53:28 +0200, Tom Tromey wrote: > > As I mentioned in the earlier note, we want to provide scripting > > support > > (dot) > > > based on Python. From our perspective, Python is the best > > choice because it is popular and generally acceptable. > > This is already your personal bias, it may be worth to design the scripting > support easy enough to add more language bindings there (such as Perl XS). > (I do not track your GDB patches to say more about them.) I would expect that any even vaguely successful implementation would be sufficiently api/library based that scripting language support us a matter of proving the correct bindings. I.e. pretty much any scripting language should be possible. Any attempt to tie it to a specific scripting language is likely to allow implementation details to bleed into the core, which would be a major limitation. So, perhaps we should primarily focus on the actual debugging core? That doesn't exclude the use of a specific chosen language to provide at least a prototype of an interface to interact with the core for testing purposes (and possibly later on as a more production-level interface), but we should be very careful not to introduce strong ties that can prove to be a major limitation later on. Kris