Re: MI and backwards compatibility

["Eli Zaretskii" <eliz at gnu dot org>]

> Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 13:24:49 -0400
> From: Bob Rossi <bob@brasko.net>
> Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
> 
> If for example the -break-list command in the MI3 protocol becomes 
> incompatible with the -break-list command that was in the MI2 protocol, 
> and the MI version is bumped from 2 to 3 because of it, 
> 
>    * will -break-list be left around for old front ends that use MI2 and a 
>    new MI command -break-list-new be created for front ends that use MI3?
> 
>    * will -break-list act differently in MI2 mode than it will for MI3
>      mode?
> 
>    or the very bad broken case,
> 
>    * will -break-list act the new way in both MI2 and MI3 mode?

It should be the second alternative.  If the first alternative were
true, we wouldn't need to bump the MI version.

> I have a gut feeling that the last case is the case GDB currently acts
> like, and this is what I am worried about. 

Shouldn't happen, but if you have examples to the contrary, let's hear
them.

> Is the documentation distributed with each version?

Yes, each GDB distribution includes the documentation.

> BTW, I think it would be helpful to put the information on this thread
> in the MI doco, so that front end developers understand the compatibility
> philosophy of GDB's MI interface.

I don't think it would be a good idea to point people at a mailing
list thread.  What we normally do is when some piece of information
like what is discussed in this thread sounds important to have in the
docs, we add the information itself to gdbint.texinfo or some other
relevant documentation file.

> Finally, thanks for the responding quickly!

You are welcome.