From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13437 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2012 14:43:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 13429 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Apr 2012 14:43:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,MISSING_HEADERS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,RCVD_VIA_APNIC X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from outbound.icp-osb-irony-out8.iinet.net.au (HELO outbound.icp-osb-irony-out8.iinet.net.au) (203.59.1.134) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 14:43:35 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhwDAMn/fk9yxkew/2dsb2JhbAANOLYCgiiEAwEBAQMBOEABEAsNCwkWDwkDAgECAUUTAQcCiAW6UJBQBJwAjRs Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.0.10]) ([114.198.71.176]) by outbound.icp-osb-irony-out8.iinet.net.au with ESMTP; 06 Apr 2012 22:43:32 +0800 Message-ID: <4F7F011B.9050003@netspace.net.au> Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 14:43:00 -0000 From: Russell Shaw User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101030 Icedove/3.0.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Will therefore GDB utilize C++? Not. References: <20120330161403.GA17891@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87aa2rjkb8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <201204042155.q34LtJNB013402@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <4F7D8603.90801@redhat.com> <201204060034.q360Yo0m007419@new.toad.com> <4F7E4849.1090104@netspace.net.au> <20120406131619.GI27438@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20120406131619.GI27438@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2012-04/txt/msg00054.txt.bz2 On 06/04/12 23:16, Joel Brobecker wrote: >>> I do not recommend that GDB use C++. >> ... >> All it requires is a few more short lines of explanatory design >> notes scattered through the code and clarity of thought. > > This is almost offensive. If it was that easy, how about you start > sending some patches? I made up a heap of gdb patches over several months for a microcontroller a few years ago, and used those patches for real work. There was still a bit of buggyness i couldn't fix. I did not submit them because i could not verify them in a robust way due to the gdb internals documentation i found very lacking, but my (lack of) knowledge of unix process handling was a contributor too. I definitely would not have put in the effort if it meant dealing with C++. I'm not doing any gdb work until i understand how the debugging format works. There is not much documentation on that. The coding is easy. Lack of documentation is the hard part. Using C++ isn't magically going to make the internals of gdb easier to maintain.