Re: MI level command

[Nick Roberts <nickrob at gnu dot org>]

> > So would a patch implementing

> >  -gdb-mi-level
> >  ^done,level=1


> > be a good thing ?

> It would probably help some, but I don't see it as solving the problem. The MI
> version # changes very rarely, and individual MI commands can change quite a
> bit within a single MI version. On the good side, the changes to MI commands'
> output are mostly additional information that can be ignored if not recognized
> (and, hopefully, worked around if absent).

I agree. I don't have the resources to track different MI versions and hope
to make the transition from annotations to a stable MI.

> So anyway, Nick makes a similar change, but with the order of arguments being
> "SHOW-VALUE VAROBJ-HANDLE". Ouch. He also added the --no-values and
> --all-values command line arguments at the same time.

I think I *did* have the arguments the other way round initially and Andrew
Cagney advised me to reverse them. I may be wrong about that. In any case I
don't really care which order they are in but clearly there should be
consistency. Currently it seems to be a bit of a free for all but if Apple can
provide a more rigorous standard then I will be happy to try to follow it.

> I much prefer the -data-disassemble command where each piece of information is
> passed with a separate command argument flag (except for its "mixed mode"
> boolean integer as the optional last argument on the line, sigh).

This is one command I find awkward as it doesn't do what the CLI command
"disassemble" does. I guess it shows that we all want different things out
of the same interface.

Nick