Re: (Doc ping [for news and manual]) -- [PATCH 14/14] the "compile" command

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>]

> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 11:01:06 +0100
> From: Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com>
> CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, tromey@redhat.com
> 
> On 20/06/14 10:42, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 10:17:20 +0100
> >> From: Phil Muldoon <pmuldoon@redhat.com>
> >> CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, tromey@redhat.com
> >>
> >>>> +@value{GDBN}, or the compiler does not support this feature
> >>>
> >>> I think it would be good to say here which compiler(s) in what
> >>> version(s) started supporting this feature.
> >>
> >> We actually don't have one yet.  That will change soon. The GCC
> >> changes are being reviewed now (this project is a cross GCC/GDB
> >> project).  Once there is a released version number associated with a
> >> GCC version, I will add a "since GCC version ...".
> >
> > Aren't there plans in place to make this part of a known GCC version,
> > or maybe a branch where these changes are being made is already slated
> > to be included in some known version?  If so, please state that
> > version; it can be changed later if plans change or life intervenes.
> >
> > But even saying it's a GCC feature is already much more than we tell
> > now.
> 
> No, how can there be plans to slot it into a version when it is under
> review? I would suspect "the next version that GCC releases" but I am
> unfamiliar with how GCC does its release versioning.  Minor/Major and
> so on.  I don't reject your idea, I just don't know how to give a
> version when there is no version yet.

How about asking the GCC people?

Anyway, if there's no way to guesstimate the version, let's at least
say this feature requires GCC with the <put the name here> plugin.

> >>>> +compiles and links successfully, @value{GDBN} will load the object-code
> >>>> +emitted, and execute it within the context of the currently selected
> >>>> +inferior.
> >>>
> >>> When you say "and execute it", you don't mean right away, yes?
> >>> Because that's what the text conveys.  Will the execution commence
> >>> immediately, or only when the program counter gets to this code?
> >>
> >> Yes right away.  The object code is loaded and placed in a dummy frame
> >> and executed immediately.
> >
> > Then I guess "compile" is a misleading name.
> 
> Why? Is compiling not happening?  What other command names do you
> suggest?

'compile-and-execute', for example.  Or maybe there should be no new
command, but rather an extension of 'print' and 'call', which can
already call functions in the inferior.

"Compile" means just compile to object code.  When I "compile" a
program, it doesn't run.  By contrast, here it does.