Re: MI3 and async notifications

On Sat, 2019-06-15 at 08:34 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > > > > > "Jan" == Jan Vrany <[email protected]> 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