RE: [cdt-dev] RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology subgroup

[Doug Schaefer <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>]

Absolutely! From the CDT perspective, I'd like to think we have an open
slate. While we need to continue supporting our MI integration and other
existing CDI clients, the move to the flexible hierarchy is appealing. I am
eagerly awaiting the prototyping effort going on in DSDP device debugging to
understand where that group wants to go. I am also very interested in
requirements from other groups such as PTP.

However, what I don't have a good feel for at the moment is what common
framework is needed above the Eclipse Platform that would make sense to go
in the CDT. We'll all need to work together to figure out what it is and I'd
like us to make a decision on what we are building and who is going to build
it by the CDT Fall Summit. To meet that tight timeline, think we need to
start the discussions soon.
 
Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems
Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC member
http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com
 

-----Original Message-----
From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Greg Watson
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 11:12 AM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology subgroup

Doug,

I wonder if we could be involved in the design of the next generation  
debugger model? We're also looking at how to use the flexible debug  
model for the parallel debugger. Since we reused considerable  
portions of CDT debugger functionality in the parallel debugger  
implementation, it would make sense to try and combine efforts here.

Greg

On May 12, 2006, at 8:19 AM, Doug Schaefer wrote:

> BTW, Welcome Toni!
>
> We've been in need of some focus on the CDT editor for a while and  
> I look
> forward to your contributions.
>
> Cheers,
> Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems
> Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC member
> http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gaff, Doug
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 2:43 PM
> To: Device Debugging developer discussions
> Cc: Leherbauer, Anton; CDT General developers list.
> Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology subgroup
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I've asked Toni Leherbauer from my team to provide input on the  
> editor.
> Toni is currently looking at enhancing the CDT editor and is  
> collecting
> some features on the CDT project plan.
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/CDT/planning/4.0
>
> Since there is interest in the editor in both the CDT and DD projects,
> we should keep both groups in the loop.  And of course, we should have
> one editor solution in the end (in CDT).  We started discussing  
> this in
> the DD project in Toronto simply as a way to capture requirements as
> they related to debugging.
>
> Also, as I mentioned on the recent DD call, Ted and Pawel are  
> working on
> a prototype for a generic debugger implementation of the Eclipse 3.2
> debug model interfaces (EDMI 3.2 for short).  The goal is that this
> prototype will form the basis of a next-generation debugger model that
> benefits folks using CDT and folks working directly with the Eclipse
> platform today.  We intend to get this committed in the next few weeks
> so that the community can start discussing architecture,  
> interfaces, and
> requirements.
>
> So regarding the editor, I see open questions around how we integrate
> disassembly, breakpoints, instruction pointers, etc. with a new  
> debugger
> implementation.  I am also wondering how the editor will deal with
> multiple debug engines simultaneously (for example, how to set the
> default breakpoint scope).
>
> Doug
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-
>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 2:18 PM
>> To: Device Debugging developer discussions
>> Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology subgroup
>>
>> Well, the Using Visual C++ 5 book that I have in front of me right
> now,
>> copyright 1997, shows their Disassembly View which interleaves source
> and
>> disassembly.
>>
>> Mind you it's a view and not an editor. But then, why would you edit
> in
>> this
>> window? Does the assembly get updated based on the source changes you
>> make?
>> Can you edit the assembly and have the source updated? (That'd be
> cool,
>> BTW
>> :).
>>
>> What was the original use case again?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Doug Schaefer, QNX Software Systems
>> Eclipse CDT Project Lead, Tools PMC member
>> http://cdtdoug.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Recoskie, Chris
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 1:30 PM
>> To: Device Debugging developer discussions
>> Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology subgroup
>>
>> I'm guessing the person I was talking to was referring to US patent #
>> 6,493,868.  Like I said I'm not a patent lawyer so I'm not going to
>> comment as to whether or not it is truly applicable or not.  It seems
>> very broad and I'm not sure of the rules as to how it does or does  
>> not
>> apply to specific features in IDEs.
>>
>> Anyway take a look and due your due diligence.  It may be a non  
>> issue.
>>
>>
>> =====================
>>
>>
>> United States Patent  6,493,868
>> DaSilva ,   et al.  December 10, 2002
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> --
>> --------
>> Integrated development tool
>>
>>
>> Abstract
>> An integrated code development tool, comprising of an editor, a
> project
>> management and build system, a debugger, a profiler, and a graphical
>> data visualization system. The editor is operable to provide a source
>> code view which is simultaneously capable of integrating with said
>> debugger to provide for stepping through code and setting  
>> breakpoints,
>> and integrating with the output of said build system to display  
>> source
>> code interleaved with corresponding assembler code created by said
> build
>> system.
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________________
>>
>> Chris Recoskie
>> Software Designer
>> Texas Instruments, Toronto
>> http://eclipse.org/cdt
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-
>>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Cortell
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 11:51 AM
>>> To: Device Debugging developer discussions
>>> Subject: RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology subgroup
>>>
>>> If this is true, it's extremely surprising. Interleaved
>>> source/disassemble is a staple in many debuggers. How a company
> would
>>> go about successfully patenting the implementation of such a feature
>>> in an open source product is puzzling, to say the least.
> Copyrighting
>>> an implementation is one thing; patenting the idea is another story.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> At 10:28 AM 5/10/2006, Recoskie, Chris wrote:
>>>> A caveat:
>>>>
>>>> I have heard that TI holds a patent on showing interleaved
>>>> source/disassembly in the editor window (but not in other windows,
> so
>>>> the current Disassembly View does not infringe this patent as I
>>>> understand it).  I don't think it would be any sort of problem to
> get
>>>> this patent licensed royalty-free to Eclipse for such a feature,
> but
>> it
>>>> is an IP issue that will have to go through due diligence for sure.
>>>>
>>>> Disclaimer:  I am not a patent lawyer and I have no authority to
>> license
>>>> the aforementioned patent, if it exists, on behalf of TI.
>>>>
>>>> ___________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> Chris Recoskie
>>>> Software Designer
>>>> Texas Instruments, Toronto
>>>> http://eclipse.org/cdt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-
>>>>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Cortell
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 9:19 AM
>>>>> To: Device Debugging developer discussions;
>> dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Subject: Re: [dsdp-dd-dev] Editor technology subgroup
>>>>>
>>>>> Ewa,
>>>>>
>>>>> What are the BV bug numbers? They're not Bugzilla reports from
>> what I
>>>> can
>>>>> tell.
>>>>>
>>>>> I entered a bugzilla report for "Jump to Line" a while back
>>>>>
>>>>>          https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=118147
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We are also very interested in mixed disassembler/source mode
>>>>> debugging. It seems this would be best implemented if indeed all
>>>>> three modes are provided in the editor. Your suggested approach
>> seems
>>>>> feasible to me; the debugger could generate files on the fly.
> The
>>>>> trick would be to make that  approach look natural to the user,
> so
>>>>> he's not aware that he's looking at a temporary file.
>>>>>
>>>>> John
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> At 08:46 PM 5/9/2006, Ewa Matejska wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm soliciting ideas for enhancements to the Editor to  improve
>> the
>>>>>> embedded development experience.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Possible ideas are:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Add the "Jump to Line" option the editor margin menu.
>> BV118147.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Merge the Disassembly view into the Editor.  This could be
>>>>>> achieved in having a special read-only debug file for each
> debug
>>>>>> session whose state would toggle between source, disassembly
> and
>>>>>> mixed in some way. Related bug is BV39644.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These ideas will be captured at:
>>>>>> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/DSDP/DD/Editor
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris Recoskie, as the lead of the Disassembly View, what do
> you
>>>>>> think of idea#2?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank You,
>>>>>> Ewa.
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
>>>>>> dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
>>>>> dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
>>>> dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
>>> dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
>> dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
>> dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
> _______________________________________________
> dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
> dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev

_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev