Re: improve gud-gdb completion

[Stephen Leake]

Michael Welsh Duggan <mwd@md5i.com> writes:

> Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:
>
>> Michael Welsh Duggan <mwd@md5i.com> writes:
>>
>>> Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> I'd like to improve completion in gud-gdb.
>>>>
>>>> Currently, it completes on names in the buffer being debugged, but it
>>>> doesn't include "." in the name, so if I'm trying to print
>>>> "Incremental_Parser.Parse_Errors.Length", it only completes to
>>>> "Incremental_Parser".
>>>>
>>>> However, I can't figure out exactly what elisp code is harvesting names
>>>> from the buffer.
>>>>
>>>> TAB is bound to completion-at-point.
>>>>
>>>> completion-at-point-functions is
>>>> (gud-gdb-completion-at-point comint-completion-at-point t)
>>>>
>>>> (default-value 'completion-at-point-functions) is
>>>> (tags-completion-at-point-function)
>>>>
>>>> None of those completion functions look at the text in buffers.
>>>>
>>>> What am I missing?
>>>
>>> Are you certain that it looks at the text in buffers at all?  If you
>>> look at gud-gdb-completions, you'll see that it uses gdb's completion
>>> mechanism based on symbols in the binary.
>>
>> It finds names from my code; "Incremental_Parser" above.
>>
>> I found a workaround by replacing the completion with hippie-expand, but
>> I'd still like to understand how the original configuration works.
>
> I'm afraid I don't understand.  If you are debugging a binary that
> contains the "Incremental_Parser" symbol, then gdb knows that, and its
> completion mechanism returns that.  

Ah, sorry, I misread what you wrote. Ok, that answers my question, and to
fix my original problem, I'd have to modify gdb itself.

-- 
-- Stephe