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
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.