Re: GDB/MI questions
Bob Rossi <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gdb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 11:15:10AM -0500, Simon Marchi wrote: > On 2017-01-19 11:03, Bob Rossi wrote: > >On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 10:47:21AM -0500, Simon Marchi wrote: > >>On 2017-01-19 10:11, Bob Rossi wrote: > >>>I'm just trying to provide the same functionality I did when I was using > >>>annotations. This was one of the noted differences. > >>> > >>>Since the MI differs in this area, I've done as you suggested and > >>>that works well. I guess I'll see if there are any downsides here. > >>> > >>>Thanks, > >>>Bob Rossi > >> > >>From experience (I'd like to be proven wrong), it will be very difficult > >>to > >>accurately re-create the gdb console "experience" when using MI. The > >>commands that should or should not repeat is just one example. Consider > >>history, tab completion, readline bindings (e.g. ctrl-R), pagination, > >>etc. > >>How does that work with the MI version of cgdb? > > > >CGDB links to readline so the interaction is all very similar. > > I'm curious how completion works currently (with annotations) for example. > When the user presses tab, does readline call a callback that you specified > in CGDB in order to get the completion candidates? Then, you get that > information from gdb and return it? If so, how do you get it? The > "complete" command? > > If it already works fine like that, then I guess it can work Yes! Exactly. ... > >I might give that a try. However, since CGDB already has great terminal > >emulation, it's not a huge deal. The other downside is, CGDB works with > >lots of GDB's. Using this feature leaves behind many GDBs. Or I'd have > >to support two modes. Yuck. > > You are right, that's the downside of newer stuff... I'll have to check out this new functionality... Thanks, Bob Rossi