Re: Grand Unified Debugger Rewrite's process buffer: comint, eterm or

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

>> > I have started to rewrite gud from the ground up.
>> That's interesting.  I hope you will start with the assumption that
>> there are several active GUD sessions (each using potentially different
>> debuggers for different languages).  It's a kind of change that's
>> difficult to make after the fact, but that's fairly easy to build-in
>> from the beginning.

> Yep.

Good, thank you.

> [..digression/rant..]

Glad to here it.

>> > 1. I can stick with comint.el. It seems the most creaky.
>> > 2. term.el is pretty cool, but it doesn't provide a hook to run when
>> > output is produced and this is something I need. I use it both in
>> > comint.el and eshell.el in "shell tracker" (think pdb-track) mode. So
>> > this leads to the last choice ...
>> 
>> In order to make a choice, I think we need to know what problems we're
>> trying to address.
>> 

> Perhaps some of this is addressed above.

Not at all.  The apparently relevant issues have to do with whether or
not you need a terminal emumlation and things like that.
My recommendation: stick to comint.


        Stefan