This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
RE: GDB and scripting languages - which
- From: "Kaz Kylheku" <kaz at zeugmasystems dot com>
- To: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at gnu dot org>
- Cc: <jimb at codesourcery dot com>, <gdb at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 16:38:43 -0800
- Subject: RE: GDB and scripting languages - which
Eli Zaretskii:
> Aren't we talking about a scripting language to allow decent scripting
> _inside_ GDB, i.e. about extension _to_ GDB, as opposed to making GDB
> an extension of other programs?
I don't see a significant difference between these situations. I'm only
thinking about a process image, in which I simultaneously have GDB and
the run-time of some programming language. Who gets the main entry point
when that image is started is largely irrelevant.
If GDB is packaged in such a way that it can be used as a component in
other programs, the behavior of an extended GDB can be easily achieved.
Simply link GDB to a small driver program which passes control back to
GDB. that small driver program also attaches to the programming language
run-time of choice, initializes it, and registers some hooks in GDB to
be able to use it.
> > Guile is not even particularly attractive people who are
> already Scheme
> > programmers. For serious Scheme work, there are better
> implementations
> > out there.
>
> Aren't we talking about a language for extending GDB, as opposed to a
> language ``for serious Scheme work''?
Extending GDB could be serious work, and if that work is done in Scheme,
then it is serious Scheme work.