From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Guile and GDB Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:51:30 +0200 Message-ID: <86bpobzb3x.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8663ek2ayd.fsf@gnu.org> <87tz23udh3.fsf@arudy.ossau.uklinux.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1246002878 31400 80.91.229.12 (26 Jun 2009 07:54:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:54:38 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 26 09:54:33 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MK6GU-0000yy-NL for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:54:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39357 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MK6GU-0000oU-8i for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:54:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MK6GQ-0000nU-U3 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:54:27 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MK6GN-0000lG-03 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:54:26 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52434 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MK6GM-0000lA-Of for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:54:22 -0400 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:56721 helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MK6GM-00050n-8q for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:54:22 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1MK6GG-0007Q8-U6 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:54:16 +0000 Original-Received: from 193.50.110.50 ([193.50.110.50]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:54:16 +0000 Original-Received: from ludo by 193.50.110.50 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:54:16 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 37 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.50.110.50 X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 8 Messidor an 217 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 821D 815D 902A 7EAB 5CEE D120 7FBA 3D4F EB1F 5364 X-OS: i486-pc-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.91 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:h0G1s8HyvI4w+Dvr2pM1jWxi5AM= X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:8772 Archived-At: Hi Neil, Neil Jerram writes: > ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> Actually, it's also meant to be used directly by GDB. Normally, GDB >> should try to display SCM values on its own (using its own copy of >> `tags.h' and the corresponding printing procedures) and resort to >> calling `gdb_print ()' when it doesn't know how to display a value. >> >> In practice, GDB currently only supports the latter, which makes it >> not-so-useful (the same result can be achieved with trivial GDB macros). >> See http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2007-07/msg00231.html . > > Wow, that's pretty cool! So your patches are actually in GDB now, are > they? Yes, but as I said, they're not too useful as it stands. > Notwithstanding, it looks like my conclusion that we don't need > GDB_INTERFACE and GDB_INTERFACE_INIT in guile.c is still correct - can > you confirm that? I think so. > (In other words, instead of using some kind of registration API, I > guess that GDB either links to libguile, or looks up the gdb_* > functions that it needs dynamically, or has an independent copy of the > libguile code that it needs to do printing. Is that right?) Currently, it just calls `gdb_print ()' et al. in the inferior process. Eventually, it should use its own printers, so that it can work without interfering the process being debugged, work on core files, etc. Thanks, Ludo'.