Re: Proposal to remove Python 2 support
Tom Tromey <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gdb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Burgess <[email protected]> writes: Andrew> Something that I think might be related here, or at least worth Andrew> mentioning, is guile support. Andrew> Without knowing (a) what the new feature is, or (b) how Tom plans to Andrew> implement... Andrew> Can the feature be added to guile in the same super clean / clever Andrew> way? If not are we taking the position that this feature just Andrew> wouldn't be available on guile? Or would we potentially end up Andrew> implementing the feature the "other way" anyway? Normally features are added to the Python or Guile layer based on developer interest. So, they aren't really at parity in general. I don't really know if Guile has anything that Python is missing. Maybe something to do with I/O -- I'm not super familiar with it. But IIRC Guile doesn't have frame filters, unwinder support, or TUI windows. Maybe more is missing there as well. I don't know if inferior control can be added to the Guile layer easily, but I would assume so, because Scheme generally has better support for continuation-like things than other languages. Andrew> Additionally there's always the option of supporting a particular Andrew> feature only when the user compiles against a particular Python Andrew> version. I guess this would depend on how tightly coupled the feature Andrew> ends up being to the rest of the GDB/Python code. I don't really like to do this kind of thing because the user experience is bad -- gdb might or might not work. Though of course we're already in that situation since the entire scripting layer is optional. Tom