[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cdt-dev] Question on future debugger interface
- From: Elena Laskavaia <elaskavaia@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:04:13 -0400
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Organization: QNX
- User-agent: Thunderbird 188.8.131.52 (X11/20080505)
If you implement mi protocol it is less work on IDE side (just another
launch config), however mi does not support all commands and mi
integration use "CDI" (user gdb) commands too, which makes it ugly.
The other approach is to create another implementation of this layer for
your specific debugger, which would be more work but it may be more robust.
Rick Moseley wrote:
The open source Frysk debugger development
team(http://sourceware.org/frysk) is currently debating how best to
integrate with the Eclipse CDT plugin. We have been discussing the
pros and cons of the two different ways to interface: 1) have an API
library such as libfrysk or 2) use the current wire protocol used by
gdb/mi that is currently in use in the CDT.
The Frysk team would very much appreciate the opinion(s) of the CDT
developers as regards to which way they would prefer to see a debugger
interface with the CDT and why. Which way would make it the easiest
for developers to use?
Thank you in advance for your time.
cdt-dev mailing list