Re: Will therefore GDB utilize C++ or not?

[Daniel Jacobowitz <daniel.jacobowitz@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/09/2012 08:05 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 20:41:31 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote:
>>> Indeed, gdbserver would need to remain pure C,
>> [...]
>>> This is important, because we want gdbserver to be usable
>>> in #1, resource constrained scenarios where the C++ dependency would
>>> be unacceptable.  We don't want there to need to be other gdbserver-like
>>> programs specialized for such environments, and gdbserver to be usable only
>>> on bigger machines.  We want gdbserver to run everywhere.  And #2, the debugger
>>> is one of the first programs that is desirable to get running on a new
>>> system/board.  Usually you get C going much sooner than C++.

The more things we add to gdbserver, the less I think it meets the
goal of "simple, light-weight target agent".  I resisted code sharing
with GDB for a long time.  If the consensus nowadays is that code
sharing is the way to go, then I think it behooves someone to figure
out the needs of a modern light-weight target agent that's a lot
smaller than gdbserver.

Yes, multiprocess debugging with gdbserver is an awesome development.
No, you don't need it in the stage of system bringup where you don't
have C++, if you're planning to have C++ eventually.  So I think
there's room for a potential C++ gdbserver and a small C gdbserver.

How did I end up being the curmudgeon?  I'm confused.

-- 
Thanks,
Daniel