From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21801 invoked by alias); 17 May 2005 19:33:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact insight-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: insight-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 21746 invoked from network); 17 May 2005 19:33:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 17 May 2005 19:33:31 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j4HJXVnQ006848 for ; Tue, 17 May 2005 15:33:31 -0400 Received: from pobox.toronto.redhat.com (pobox.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.4]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j4HJXTO19185; Tue, 17 May 2005 15:33:30 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4HJXQep020972; Tue, 17 May 2005 15:33:27 -0400 Message-ID: <428A4705.9040803@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 19:33:00 -0000 From: Fernando Nasser User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Johnson CC: insight@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Current Status of Insight References: <42896711.8070400@sakuraindustries.com> In-Reply-To: <42896711.8070400@sakuraindustries.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-q2/txt/msg00080.txt.bz2 Steven Johnson wrote: > Paul Schlie wrote: > >>>> But what Java does not have - is a command line it is >>>> compiled langauge Tcl/Tk - it is some what enherent. >>>> >>> >>> Well, something similar could be implemented in Java with BeanShell >>> (http://www.beanshell.org/). jEdit uses this. >>> >> >> >> >> > Wouldnt a front end to GDB written in Java, and using MI be Eclipse > CDT? Surely it would be better to contribute to that project, if thats > what people wanted, rather than do it again? The Eclipse CDT GDB Front > end certainly seems to need a lot of work, especially where access to > the GDB command line, and embedded development are concerned (I cant > find how to do a "Load" from the interface, for example). [This is not > a criticism of Eclipse/CDT or the work they have already done, which is > a lot, just an observation.] > Unfortunately that code is tightly coupled with Eclipse. Ans many people don't want to use Eclipse, just a debugger GUI. > > I also would have thought, from the FSF view, "JAVA" would be more evil > [def: less compaitble with the ideals of the FSF] than "tcl" because > "JAVA" isnt really free. Im sure most people have seen the message on > the FSF sites about Java. > That is moot. The MI interface is standard and decouples whatever GUI it is from GDB. One can write it under whichever license, whichever language, anything. There are many GUIs already written with MI that fall in all possible categories you can imagine. MI is not an API, it is a line protocol where messages are exchanged in an ASCII format. Think of it as a SOAP poor cousin.