repo to work on python scripting support

[Doug Evans]

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 10:32 PM, Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> wrote:
>  I've been thinking... maybe we do want $(...) to allow things other
>  than Python commands.  Or, more precisely, maybe we want to let Python
>  code register a function by name for use in $(...).  The Python
>  function would get the uninterpreted string argument for processing.

OOC, Would there be an intent to not disallow dynamically loaded C/C++
instead of Python for $(foo)? [Emphasis on OOC.]

>  My reason is that after playing a bit, I'm not over-fond of the
>  verboseness and extra quoting required by the Python bits.  It is more
>  gdb-ish, I think, not to do this.
>
>  Any opinions?
>
>  The canonical example is a function to match the calling function at a
>  breakpoint.  gdb-ish:
>
>     break inner if $(caller-is outer)
>
>  Pythonic:
>
>     break inner if $(gdb.caller_is ('outer'))

Parsing two separate languages in one line is problematic too (I'm not
sure how far the Pythonic version was intended to be interpreted).