Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[cdt-debug-dev] MI Future work 
Tom @ redhat com started a few words on this, but since the agenda
for the meeting was full, the subject was not expanded.

The state of things.  CDT 1.0.x will use gdb 5.2.1 or any
debugger providing MI level 1 as define by gdb 8-).
The debugger(gdb) is actually started with the options "-mi1"
to make sure it will fail upfront, for example it will not work
reliably with gdb-5.0(mi0) and break in a lot of places.

However, for the future we would like :

- to take advantages of the new "mi2" but still work with "mi1".
  To do this, the code need some refactoring to isolate common parts
  from dependent mi level.

- on  the gdb side, it would be __really__ nice if the we could
  query gdb about the current default level of mi it supports:

  (gdb) -mi-current-level
  ^done,value=1
  (gdb)

  or something.  This could allow the CDT/MI plugin to query
  about the level and adjust the parser at runtime, say we
  have parser for mi 1 and mi 2.

- gdb-5.4 (mi 2) has better oob support to provide feedback.
  For example, one problem with the current mi, it does not provid
  enough information for the event thread handler to make a decision.

- keith @ redhat was working on some interpreter, we would like
  to see to take advantage to finish the prompt interface.


We've received a __lot__ of request/features/enhancement from
our customers, QNX internal tools group, Eclipse CDT/Bugzilla.  It
goes from having things like:

..  Something similar to DDD, to visualize variables

to

... debugging a process that is fork()ing whether to take
    advantage of gdb catchpoints or some other mechanism

and the holy grail

... debugging JNI code with the C debugger and the Java debugger
    working together. 


We are reviewing the feedbacks and looking at what's feasible
for 1.1.x(or what ever we call it).  To late for 1.0.x.
If more ideas, please forward to the list or bugzilla or  etc ....



BTW, many thanks to redhat for always reacting to our complaints
about gdb/mi and fixing bugs.  Thanks Alifiya, for some good Q/A 8-)

Back to the top