Hi Dobrin,
Alain Magloire is
working on the GDB integration and I am working on the UI components
of the CDT debugger.
I contributed the
Registers view to the Eclipse debug platform. The new view is based on the
Variables view and takes advantage of the features that Variables view
provides.
You are absolutely right,
the MI interface doesn't support register groups. But if you have a
version of gdb that supports it, there are ways to extend CDT. I'll take a
look at it probably next week.
Mikhail Khodjaints
QNX Software Systems
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday,
April 28, 2004 11:31 AM
Subject: RE:
[cdt-debug-dev] Regsiter gorups in CDT
Alan, Mikhail,
This is the direction I
was trying to go as well in my previous two e-mails.
>>> The Eclipse Debug
model defines the register groups and that's why the GUI is based on a tree
view. CDT inserts
>>> only one group
Main. Looks like it is a limitation of the GDB interface.
>>> Can you guys give
me some thoughts of possible enhancing the CDT so it can show multiple groups
with the
>>> limitation of
the current version of the MI interface. I was thinking in the line of coding
the group name
>>> in the
"main:pc", "group2:reg3" or something like that.
>>> From a design
point I see two options:
>>> 1. Ask the
debugger about its register groups.
>>> 2. Assume the
processor groups are entirely Eclipse feature and don’t get the debugger
involved in it.
>>> I lean toward 1
and here is why…
Can you guys introduce
yourself?
Looks to me that Alan
owns the Register View and Mikhail the GDB integration.
I am currently trying to
figure out how to add processor groups through GDB and to contribute that code
to CDT.
Mikhail,
The problem I have is that
I don’t see a command in MI that deals with registry groups.
Is it possible for CDT to
define a way so GDB implementers that feel that this feature is valuable will
conform to the CDT extension?
If it is well defined I
think there will be GDB implementers in the embedded space that will follow and
integrate this feature.
Or may be we can add this
feature in MI interface, it has been there but not implemented if I am correct.
For GDBs that don’t
deal will groups the Main group will be added by default as in the current
implementation.
Or may be another
suggestion – if the registered returned by GDB have special symbol we can
treat that as group separator – “main::pc”,
“group2::reg3”.
Please advise.
Dobrin
-----Original Message-----
From: cdt-debug-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-debug-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Alan Boxall
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004
10:37 AM
To: cdt-debug-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [cdt-debug-dev] Regsiter
gorups in CDT
In R3.0 there is a Register view in the core (org.eclipse.debug.ui) that
supports groups.
I have
moved from my plugin's register view (that supported groups) to the core
register view and it works.
The
IStackFrame interface will allow your stackframe to return register groups
(IRegisterGroup) and in turn register groups can return registers (IRegister).
I
don't want register groups added in any way that will make them
persistent. My debug plugin supports many different platforms and
cpu architectures and must build the list of registers and groups
dynamically. As the user clicks on each debug target in the
debug view it must populate the register's view based on the current target.
