This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/rfc] mi interpreter-complete enh req 8058.
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Matt Rice <ratmice at gmail dot com>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:55:10 -0600
- Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] mi interpreter-complete enh req 8058.
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Matt" == Matt Rice <email@example.com> writes:
Matt> Attached is a patch i've ported from Apple's gdb...
Matt> it implements a tab-completion like function for MI
Matt> I figured I would post a basic port of the patch for discussion,
Matt> before doing to much to it.
Matt> it only implements complete_proc for the console interpreter, why
Matt> then 'interpreter-complete' if only the console interpreter
Matt> implements it?
I have no idea.
Matt> it has arbitrary limits of 200 completions which has never really been
Matt> a part of the gnu credo:
Matt> one idea is to introduce a limit argument to the mi command, but that
Matt> brings up the idea of bringing in a starting point for resuming
Matt> completion, and getting multiple batches
Matt> without some form of a continuation it'd have to redo the
Matt> completion each batch, it seems difficult/impossible to invalidate
Matt> the completion e.g. if loading/completing symbols
Matt> so maybe we should forgo the batching but add the limit to the mi command?
Yeah, some solution here would be nice to have.
This is related to http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9007
I suppose some kind of continuation is not out of the question.
Matt> I also notice it doesn't implement the all? argument that he mentioned
Matt> in the bug report.
If you don't need that, you can ignore it, IMO.
Matt> also need to add a -list-features thing...
I think it is probably fine not to do that and just let clients catch
the error coming from older GDBs.
Matt> adding arguments and things obviously would break compatibility with
Matt> their gdb, is this an issue?
IMO, it is not an issue. But, if it is easy to be compatible, we might
as well be.
Matt> -interpreter-complete console "b ma"
It is weird to see all those useless "c=" strings in there :-)
The patch seems reasonable enough. There are some GNU style issues to
clean up. And, this would need an update to the manual.