Re: [Cgdb-users] cgdb & automake

[Bob R. <bob...@co...>]

On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 04:43:01PM -0400, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> I think that's fine.  If, in the future, you wanted to export a single
> library, you could always generate one out of the sublibraries.
>=20
> One of these days I'm seriouly going to finish up that config stuff.
> How do the key bindings work right now?  I'm thinking about adding a
> 'bind' when I create the config file parser.

As of now, libinput receives all input from the tty.
It translates the escape sequences into the keys they represent.

All libinput returns is a regular key or a macro ( CGDB_KEY_UP ).

cgdb uses libinput to get keys. It has hard-coded into it things like

key =3D input_getch();

if ( key =3D=3D CGDB_KEY_UP )
   ...

So, I can imagine that your code will be between libinput and cgdb.

Bobby

>=20
> Peter
>=20
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 08:30:28PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >=20
> > I re-organized the make system for cgdb/tgdb.
> >=20
> > The new way creates many libraries instead of only one monolithic libtg=
db.a
> >=20
> > This is good because:
> > 1. It physically separates the code into directories.
> > 2. Makes code easier to find and understand
> > 3. It forces units to only rely on lower units
> >=20
> > Its bad because:
> > 1. The user that wants to link to libtgdb has to link to its dependents
> >    The current list is already 5 libraries.=20
> >    ( -lutil -ladt -lannotate-two -lgdbmi -ltgdb )
> > 2. It slows down ./configure;make;make install
> >=20
> > What does everyone think?
>=20
> --=20
> Peter D. Kovacs <pe...@ko...>