From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18134 invoked by alias); 17 Oct 2014 12:06:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 18063 invoked by uid 89); 17 Oct 2014 12:06:04 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 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 (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:06:04 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s9HC5x6M023600 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 17 Oct 2014 08:05:59 -0400 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-79.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.79]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s9HC5thG024878 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 17 Oct 2014 08:05:58 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:06:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=96mer_Sinan_A=C4=9Facan?= Cc: Stan Shebs , gdb Subject: Re: GDB C API -- does such a thing exist? Message-ID: <20141017120555.GC7123@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <5440588D.8060503@earthlink.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-10/txt/msg00064.txt.bz2 On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 08:44:30 +0200, Ömer Sinan Ağacan wrote: > One thing that I'm confused about this MI thing is that even IDEs > don't use it, as far as I can see. MI is not such a win as I have written in the other mail: On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 14:02:50 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote: # MI implements only very poor subset of GDB functionality # so one has to use '-interpreter-exec console ...' anyway and parse the # unparsable text output. There is a theoretical suggestion that people should implement into GDB anything they miss. But contributability to GDB is difficult for many reasons besides that it is just an additional barrier to write an MI client (when one has to write also the MI server along). Jan