RE: [cdt-debug-dev] AddressFactory for CDebugTarget

[<Ling.5.Wang@xxxxxxxxx>]

Great, that's surely a better way of implementation. Thanks.

-- Ling 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-debug-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cdt-debug-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ext 
> John Cortell
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 4:36 PM
> To: CDT Debug developers list; cdt-debug-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [cdt-debug-dev] AddressFactory for CDebugTarget
> 
> Ling,
> 
> That sounds reasonable to me. However, changing ICDITarget 
> would break backwards compatibility (compile-time and 
> run-time). This should be added via a new ICDITargetN 
> interface. There is precedent for this technique in CDT; see 
> ICDITargetConfiguration2.
> 
> John
> 
> At 04:28 PM 1/25/2007, Ling.5.Wang@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >There is a case in our debugger that a CDebugTarget has no 
> binary file 
> >associated with it. For instance, we need to connect debugger to a 
> >device and just do pure assembly level debug without any 
> source level 
> >debug, namely no binary file is required.
> >
> >I managed to create a CDT target without a binary object. But to 
> >display addresses of stack frames, an IAddressFactory is needed. In 
> >CDebugTarget.getAddressFactory(),
> >
> >         public IAddressFactory getAddressFactory() {
> >                 if ( fAddressFactory == null ) {
> >                         if ( getExecFile() != null && 
> getProject() != 
> >null ) {
> >                                 IBinaryObject file;
> >                                 file = getBinaryFile();
> >                                 if (file != null) {
> >                                         fAddressFactory = 
> >file.getAddressFactory();
> >                                 }
> >                         }
> >                 }
> >                 return fAddressFactory;
> >         }
> >
> >we can see it requires an binary file to work. So to get rid of that 
> >requirement, I'm considering adding an CDI interface like
> >         ICDITarget.getAddressFactory() Which would ask CDI 
> target to 
> >provide a default IAddressFactory.
> >
> >The implementation of the new interface can simply be 
> "return null" for 
> >most debuggers, while with our debugger it's like this:
> >         return new Addr32Factory();
> >
> >What do you think ? Or any other better solution ?
> >
> >Thanks.
> >
> >-- Ling
> >_______________________________________________
> >cdt-debug-dev mailing list
> >cdt-debug-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-debug-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-debug-dev mailing list
> cdt-debug-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-debug-dev
>