ddbg_gdb with emacs

[Bill Baxter]

Jascha Wetzel wrote:
> i'll have issue1 fixed in the next release. also "print" and "clear"
> will be added.

Great!

>> ISSUE 2:
>> [...]
>> "  source C:/tmp/mingwdbg/hello.c:22:"
> 
> what do you mean by that "source" there?

Sorry that's what gdb outputs when you use "--annotate" instead of 
"--fullname".  Only relevant if your going to parse --annotate output. 
For --fullname it's just
"  C:/tmp/mingwdbg/hello.c:22:"

>> (concat "\032\032\\(.:?[^" ":" "\n]*\\)" ":" "\\([0-9]*\\)" ":" ".*\n"))
> 
> what are the double backslashes doing there? 

That's an emacs-regex thing.  \( \) are group delimiters and ( ) are 
literal parentheses in emacs.

> aren't the brackets
> supposed to group the matches? if it's just an implementation detail and
> the regexp is actually
> \032\032(.:?[^:\n]*):([0-9]*):.*\n
> then the lines ddbg outputs should match.

Yeh, that's the regexp emacs uses for basic non-annotate mode.  Like I 
said in my next message it looks like it should be matching, so my guess 
is just that it doesn't know what to do with a missing filename.

> codeblocks uses
> \032\032([A-Za-z]:)([^:]+):([0-9]+):[0-9]+:[begmidl]+:(0x[0-9A-z]+)

Is that the only regex they use?  Because that doesn't look like it 
would match without the filename.  It also doesn't look like it would 
match MinGW gdb's output which is like:
"  C:/tmp/mingwdbg/hello.c:22:496:beg:0x401322"

Note "beg" vs "begmidl".


--
One more minor commandline usability nit:
ddbg_gdb doesn't work without an -args parameter.


-bb