From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 88622 invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2019 10:53:35 -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 88612 invoked by uid 89); 17 Jun 2019 10:53:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*r:user, consumers, HX-Languages-Length:1434, H*r:238 X-HELO: relay.fit.cvut.cz Received: from relay.fit.cvut.cz (HELO relay.fit.cvut.cz) (147.32.232.237) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 Jun 2019 10:53:32 +0000 Received: from imap.fit.cvut.cz (imap.fit.cvut.cz [IPv6:2001:718:2:2901:0:0:0:238]) by relay.fit.cvut.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x5HArLXw060739 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 12:53:23 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jan.vrany@fit.cvut.cz) Received: from [IPv6:2a02:c7d:2fcb:c700:6267:20ff:fee4:3e2c] ([IPv6:2a02:c7d:2fcb:c700:6267:20ff:fee4:3e2c]) (authenticated bits=0 as user vranyj1) by imap.fit.cvut.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x5HArF3C002437 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 12:53:15 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from jan.vrany@fit.cvut.cz) Message-ID: Subject: Re: MI3 and async notifications From: Jan Vrany To: Tom Tromey , Jonah Graham Cc: "gdb@sourceware.org" Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 10:53:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <871rzu9at0.fsf@tromey.com> References: <70fdd9107d9bb3cee0a1a342aedc05bf3c8e9bae.camel@fit.cvut.cz> <871rzu9at0.fsf@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.5-1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-06/txt/msg00035.txt.bz2 On Sat, 2019-06-15 at 08:34 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote: > > > > > > "Jan" == Jan Vrany writes: > > Jan> as an user og GDB/MI (and frontent developer), I'd like to > Jan> open a discussion about one aspect of MI that I'd like to change > Jan> in MI3 before it is released into the wild. > ... > Jan> Emitting notifications unconditionally would simplify things a lot > Jan> - again at least in my case. > > It seems like a good idea to me. I wonder if it makes sense to go even > further and say there will only be async notifications for things like > this. Yes, I thought the same initially. But then what about other existing MI consumers? >From what I understood from Jonah's comments earlier, this would break (at least) CDT. So CDT would either have to stick with MI2 (not great in a long term) or refactor their code (not sure CDT guys would be happy to do so, especially as - I presume - CDT needs to support wide range of GDB versions already in the wild, a problem I do not have). While I personally agree with you and will be happy to go that far, it'd break existing consumers - something that should IMO be carefully discussed and planned. Adding a new option as I proposed as an alternative will be backward compatible, indeed at the cost of more convoluted code in GDB itself. Is anyone from Emacs community around? Or any other MI consumers? Jan > > Tom