From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: RFC: a minor mode that uses GDB like CLI commands Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 03:11:03 +0100 Message-ID: References: <200503181858.j2IIwvAH010170@scanner2.ics.uci.edu> <87sm2rol04.fsf@jurta.org> <16958.14253.9851.210394@farnswood.snap.net.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1111371276 10685 80.91.229.2 (21 Mar 2005 02:14:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 02:14:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Juri Linkov , Dan Nicolaescu , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 21 03:14:35 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DDCQs-0007xC-Dc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Mar 2005 03:14:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DDChs-00041q-Ne for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:31:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DDChO-0003sX-7R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:31:22 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DDChL-0003s2-6n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:31:19 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DDChL-0003qE-1b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:31:19 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DDCNu-0004zG-Bc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:11:14 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DDCNt-0005wt-H4; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 21:11:13 -0500 Original-To: Nick Roberts In-Reply-To: <16958.14253.9851.210394@farnswood.snap.net.nz> (Nick Roberts's message of "Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:55:40 +1200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:34874 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:34874 Nick Roberts writes: > > It would be very good to make this mode to work like edebug > > (automatically making the source code buffer read-only, etc.) > > and to have similar keybindings: > > > > " " - step > > "n" - next > > "c" - cont > > "g" - go > > ... > > Its seems more natural to use the existing abbreviations for GDB, as Dan > suggested: > > "s" - step > "n" - next > "c" - cont > "r" - run > "b" - break > ... > > although there is clearly a significant overlap, in any case. I think we should strive to make all of this as similar as possible, so my take on it would be that we will, after the release of course, change Edebug's bindings to match the bindings of gdb more closely, as long as this works appropriately. Certainly the bindings of Edebug and Gud-mode should be identical (if the rest of the user interface is similar), and the bindings of Gud-mode and gdb itself as close as feasible. I think we will meet less total opposition if we change Edebug to match gdb more closely (where there are still discrepancies) rather than the other way round... -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum