Re: GDB/XMI (XML Machine Interface)

["Alain Magloire" <alain at qnx dot com>]

> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks to everyone that has looked at this RFC so far. I will leave the idea
> floating around for a few days to let everyone have a chance to
> respond. Then I will follow up the RFC with a summary of everyone's
> opinions.
> 
> I can see with the ideas given already, that if everyone contributes 
> (at least informationally), this RFC could be modified to fit into GDB
> very nicely.
> 

Nick "No spam" G. and other said something about this already .. I'll just reiterate.

The problem is not so much MI as a protocol then the implementation of MI in gdb 8-).
If you read the MI spec, it is not that bad .. actually very promising
and with the proposed changes from Andrew C and crew .. not bad at all.

MI did offer a consistent parsing vs protocol like Annoted {1,2}

Reality check, it hits you like a brick wall: the grand canyon between the documentation
vs actual implementation.
(some third parties like WindRiver or Apple seems to have "cleaner" implementation of MI).

Doing a clean recursive decent parser for MI, is actually very simple... 
it's just that you have to make n exceptions: inconsitencies, plain bugs,
crap etc .. the inferior output can be intertwine to the protocol, the duality CLI vs MI in an IDE,
the OOB(async notifications) being incomplete, the inconsistensies between argument parsing etc ..

Pros:
No doubt, XMI will offer an even more consistent parsing, it is a well know and formal language.
So the parsing will no longer be the focus (with all the available xml parsers) of problems.
The focus will be shift to more consistency of the data and folks can concentrate on
real issues(can we get notification for loading of dll or catch event implementation 8-) etc .. a good thing.

But whether XMI or MI the problems remains; a good implementation and resources to work on it.
GDB carries in its belly an enormous knowledge an heritage but that makes it also obese 8-(
most folks prefer to go around problems with yet another rewrite instead of digging in ...
Question: are you doing the same with this XMI proposal ? If yes you'll fall to the same trap
as MI and GDB will carry "yet another incomplete implementation" 8-)

Note:
don't get me wrong the RFC is pretty good, and for a Java programer, xml is pure symphony.