Re: [GNU ELPA] Realgud version 1.6.0

> From: Rocky Bernstein <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 15:59:18 -0500
> Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
> 
>  > I was discouraged. I learned that MI, with its binary-encoded interface, is also far from optimal.
>  Possibly,
>  > that's why MI hasn't become more widely adopted. The current thought and hope (well, actually, from
>  a
>  > decade ago), would be to support more modern remote debugging protocols, such as Microsoft's
>  debug
>  > protocol, the one that JVM/Eclipse uses, and the one that V8 uses. (There are also the DBGp and
>  Xdebug
>  > debug protocols)
>  > 
>  > The great thing about "standards" is that there are so many to choose from! But one thing is clear:
>  MI isn't a
>  > popular choice.
> 
>  GDB supports DAP since v14.
> 
> Ok, but I don't understand what that has to do with the topic of this thread: realgud and gud, neither of which
> support DAP yet. 

It has to do with your comments about GDB/MI being problematic, and
that it would be good for GDB to support more modern remote debugging
protocols.  DAP is such a protocol.

> And to be precise, gud.el doesn't directly support MI either. The additional support was done by a Google
> Summer of Code student and put in an add-on package called gdb-mi.el.

That's an outdated view.  gdb-mi.el is nowadays the main GDB interface
in Emacs, and the command "M-x gdb" invokes it, not gud.el.  "M-x gdb"
runs GDB with the "-i mi" option by default.  This has been so since
Emacs 24.