Re: [PATCH] gdb/mi: fix breakpoint script field output

[Tom de Vries <tdevries@suse.de>]

On 8/10/22 21:38, Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2022-05-26 14:21, Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2022-05-26 14:10, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Marchi via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org> writes:
>>>
>>> Simon> The "script" field, output whenever information about a breakpoint with
>>> Simon> commands is output, uses wrong MI syntax.
>>>
>>> I think this is PR mi/24285.
>>
>> Thanks, will add the footer.
>>
>>>
>>> Simon> Fix it, keeping the backwards compatibility by introducing a new MI
>>> Simon> version (MI4), in exactly the same way as was done when fixing
>>> Simon> multi-locations breakpoint output in [2].
>>>
>>> Simon>  - Add a fix_breakpoint_script_output uiout flag.  MI uiouts will use
>>> Simon>    this flag if the version is >= 4.
>>>
>>> I was under the impression that MI version 3 was somehow experimental,
>>> so we didn't need version 4 yet.  But maybe the idea is to roll out new
>>> MI versions with some regularity and just update the version whenever we
>>> think we've made a breaking change?
>>
>> MI3 is the default today, so not experimental.  I think it's fine to
>> bump the version and ship it as soon as we make a fix that is also a
>> breaking change.  There's no reason to hold back fixes.  Users (well,
>> frontends) are supposed to use the interpreter name with the version in
>> it (mi2, mi3) rather than just "mi", so they don't get bad surprises
>> when a new MI version is released.  And then they can migrate at their
>> convenience.
>>
>> Simon
> 
> I pushed this.
> 

Hi,

I'm seeing:
...
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-break.exp: mi-mode=main: test_breakpoint_commands: 
breakpoint commands: check that commands are set (unexpected output)
FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-break.exp: mi-mode=separate: test_breakpoint_commands: 
breakpoint commands: check that commands are set (unexpected output)
...
which looks like due to getting:
...
script=["print 10","continue"]
...
while expecting:
...
script=\{"print 10","continue"\}
...

Thanks,
- Tom