bug#49632: [PATCH] Ensure that M-x gdb populates gud-repeat-map

[Brian Leung]

I found a way to make gud-set-repeat-map-property a function without having to 
change repeat.el. See attached for an updated patch.

> ----------------------------------------
> From: Brian Leung <leungbk@mailfence.com>
> Sent: Tue Jul 27 06:09:14 CEST 2021
> To: Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net>
> Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>, <49632@debbugs.gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: bug#49632: [PATCH] Ensure that M-x gdb populates gud-repeat-map
> 
> 
> > Is there a reason why gud-set-repeat-map-property should be a macro,
> > but not a function?  When it's a macro, there are problems such that
> > when the user modifies the map, then the function that uses the macro
> > needs to be recompiled.
> 
> When I wrote initially wrote gud-set-repeat-map-property, I couldn't figure 
> out how to make gud-set-repeat-map-property work as a function since the 
> repeat-map property needed to be a symbol corresponding to a keymap, and not 
> an evaluated keymap.
> 
> I've updated the patch with a change to the repeat-post-hook function in 
> repeat.el to accept an evaluated keymap, which permits a function version of 
> gud-set-repeat-map-property.
> 
> > ----------------------------------------
> > From: Juri Linkov <juri@linkov.net>
> > Sent: Tue Jul 27 00:48:20 CEST 2021
> > To: Brian Leung <leungbk@mailfence.com>
> > Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>, <49632@debbugs.gnu.org>
> > Subject: Re: bug#49632: [PATCH] Ensure that M-x gdb populates gud-repeat-map
> > 
> > 
> > >> There is one thing that I don't understand: is the
> > >> helper function gud-set-repeat-map-property really needed?
> > >>
> > >> If e.g. the defvar gud-gdb-repeat-map uses such symbols as 'gud-next',
> > >> could it put the 'repeat-map' property on the same symbols
> > >> with reference to the variable 'map' directly in these defvars?
> > >> Then only defvars will be needed, and no changes in gud-gdb, gdb.
> > >
> > > If we assign the repeat-map property within the defvars and avoid doing so
> > > in the M-x gdb commands, then after gud.el gets loaded, the repeat-map
> > > property on (say) gud-next will be 'jdb, since jdb-repeat-map is the last
> > > such foo-repeat-map defvar appearing in gud.el. In that case, calling M-x
> > > perldb and then running gud-next when repeat-mode is on will bring up the
> > > jdb-repeat-map, which contains some commands that aren't defined for
> > > perldb. So I think the gud-set-repeat-map-property macro (or something 
> > > like
> > > it) is necessary.
> > 
> > You are right.  Then I have only minor comments:
> > 
> > 1. I thought that you want to create two separate maps for gud-gdb and gdb.
> > This is the reason why I suggested to rename gud-repeat-map to 
> > gud-gdb-repeat-map.
> > But since you use only one map for gbd and gud-gdb, then the name
> > gud-repeat-map is fine.
> > 
> > 2. Is there a reason why gud-set-repeat-map-property should be a macro,
> > but not a function?  When it's a macro, there are problems such that
> > when the user modifies the map, then the function that uses the macro
> > needs to be recompiled.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Sent with https://mailfence.com
> Secure and private email
> 
> -- 
> Mailfence.com
> Private and secure email


-- 
Sent with https://mailfence.com
Secure and private email

-- 
Mailfence.com
Private and secure email

0001-Ensure-that-gud-commands-for-M-x-gdb-are-handled-by-.patch
Description: File Attachment: 0001-Ensure-that-gud-commands-for-M-x-gdb-are-handled-by-.patch

0002-Ensure-that-gud-commands-for-non-GDB-debuggers-are-h.patch
Description: File Attachment: 0002-Ensure-that-gud-commands-for-non-GDB-debuggers-are-h.patch