From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 44061 invoked by alias); 6 Feb 2018 17:02:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 44052 invoked by uid 89); 6 Feb 2018 17:02:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_2,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*Ad:U*palves, Hx-languages-length:2226, eyes, act X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:02:34 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A53E72840C; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 17:02:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D9765605; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 17:02:32 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GDB 8.1 released! To: Joel Brobecker References: <20180202154032.6d2e6ig3h6xnfm55@adacore.com> Cc: GDB Patches From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <5702aae7-7f3e-3ec4-3248-695f87ec3fae@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:02:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180202154032.6d2e6ig3h6xnfm55@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-02/txt/msg00087.txt.bz2 On 02/02/2018 03:40 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > We could even split the languages section off from the last paragraph > into its own section, vis: > > | What is GDB? > | ------------ > | > | GDB, the GNU Project debugger, allows you to see what is going on > | `inside' another program while it executes -- or what another program > | was doing at the moment it crashed. > | > | GDB can do four main kinds of things (plus other things in support of > | these) to help you catch bugs in the act: > | > | * Start your program, specifying anything that might affect its behavior. > | * Make your program stop on specified conditions. > | * Examine what has happened, when your program has stopped. > | * Change things in your program, so you can experiment with correcting > | the effects of one bug and go on to learn about another. > | > | Those programs might be executing on the same machine as GDB (native) > | or on another machine (remote). Maybe add "or on a simulator". > GDB can run on most popular UNIX and | Microsoft Windows variants. Maybe add macOS here. > | > | What Languages does GDB Support? > | -------------------------------- > | > | GDB supports the following languages (in alphabetical order): > | * Ada > | * Assembly > | * C > | * C++ > | * D > | * Fortran > | * Go > | * Objective-C > | * OpenCL > | * Modula-2 > | * Pascal > | * Rust > Sounds good to me. Yeah. I don't have a strong opinion there though I lean on listing all as it avoids singling out anyone/any project and coming up with some kind of metric to decide which ones are important. Since it's a graphically separated list with some markup, not some paragraph-contributing-to-the-size-of-a-hard-to-read-wall-of-text, those who don't care about the list can just quickly and easily move their eyes past it in a split second. I.e., I don't think 10 vs 20 entries makes a difference in terms of readability. > As explained above, I fear that having this exhuastive list might > attract attention to regions of GDB that might have bitrotted a bit. I think not listing active languages is worse than also listing bitrotted languages, so I think on balance it's still better. Thanks, Pedro Alves