From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1394 invoked by alias); 7 Oct 2004 12:36:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 1381 invoked from network); 7 Oct 2004 12:35:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lakermmtao06.cox.net) (68.230.240.33) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 Oct 2004 12:35:58 -0000 Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by lakermmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.03.04 201-2131-111-106-20040729) with ESMTP id <20041007123558.RSOM3876.lakermmtao06.cox.net@white>; Thu, 7 Oct 2004 08:35:58 -0400 Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CFXUz-0003iQ-00; Thu, 07 Oct 2004 08:35:57 -0400 Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 14:15:00 -0000 From: 'Bob Rossi' To: Dave Korn Cc: 'Eli Zaretskii' , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: probing GDB for MI versions Message-ID: <20041007123557.GA14264@white> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Korn , 'Eli Zaretskii' , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20041006175117.GK12213@white> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2004-10/txt/msg00206.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 10:04:29AM +0100, Dave Korn wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: 'Bob Rossi' [mailto:bob@brasko.net] > > Sent: 06 October 2004 18:51 > > > Dave, can you write a piece of code that can take all of the output of > > GDB, from when it starts until after it exists (only given this new MI > > command), and return to me the currently supported interfaces? > > Yes, I can, but I'm not going to do it for you. Here's a hint, in shell > terms: > > echo "-mi-version" | gdb | grep "Highest supported MI version is" | .... > > [you have to fill in the ... with some kind of sed or awk command] > > > Will this code work with MI5, MI6 and MI7. Since it is likely > > that there will be syntax changes? > > As long as the body text of that string that you blindly search for > remains the same, yes it will. OK, I agree with this. Why would we add this functionality as an MI command if the front ends all have to write some adhoc parser to get the information? So, I agree that it can be done, I just think it's a terrible idea. We can do it in a much better way. Bob Rossi