Re: [cdt-dev] missing org.eclipse.cdt.debug.mi.core in Neon?
> On 24 May 2016, at 23:53, Jonah Graham <jonah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Perhaps we should pick up this discussion in a couple of weeks once we have both had time to review where we are now.
> > I need to study the changes more thoroughly, but generally I think that significant API changes should be done by adding new classes and leaving the old functionality there, not by removing old functionality.
> In an ideal world yes. That was the situation that CDT was in for 5 years since the release of CDT 8.0. However, unfortunately some of the API in 8.0 and before was simply wrong. We are in a situation that we needed to break API compatibility to fix some serious issues.
you are probably right, I do not have the overview required to comment on this.
however, if in CDT 9.0 we have the greatest and latest API, and all new code uses it successfully, I still do not understand what harm can produce keeping some of the old classes in the distribution (the org.eclipse.cdt.debug.mi.core), and avoid all these discussions. no need to maintain them, mark them as deprecated, and just keep them there for a while, until everything will be migrated to 9.0 and compatibility with 8.x will no longer be required.
> > initially I thought that starting a GDB server before the GDB client shouldn't be a big deal, but the design of DSF (or my poor understanding of it) made things very difficult.
> I am very pleased that you managed to solve these problems. I hope that some of these improvements you have identified can be fed back into CDT.
sure, if there is interest in such a solution, we can discuss how it can be fed back into CDT.