Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 13:32:53 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: Rhide vs. emacs/gdb In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Sun, 2 Apr 2000 nobody AT nowhere wrote: > Now that I'm in win95 DOS boxes rather than in pure DOS, Rhide 1.4 > crashes during debugging. Sigh, I loved Rhide. Try the latest RHIDE, it might work. > So, on to emacs. Two problems: > 1) It won't spawn a shell from the Win95 DOS box. (I was going to > compile/debug from a shell). Please describe what do you mean by ``won't spawn a shell''. Why did you need to spawn a shell? Can't you just open another DOS box and debug from there? As for compiling, you should compile from the editor (type "M-x compile", then type the command line at the prompt). This way, the editor will automatically show you the source lines which triggered warning/error messages, if any. What version of Emacs is that, anyway (what does "M-x emacs-version RET" print)? > 2) DJGPP can't link an .exe file together if GDB is open on that file. That's because GDB keeps the .exe file open, to read the debug info from it. It is a bad idea to replace the program being debugged anyway, since the info which GDB has already read will be incorrect. The right way to do this is to type "kill" from inside the debugger. This kills the debugged program, and you can then rebuild it. To debug again, say "file prog.exe" (where prog.exe is the name of your program). > So I have to close gdb (and lose any breakpoints I have set), compile, start > gdb again, etc.. You can put all the breakpoints on a script file and instruct GDB to read that file each time you restart the debugging session. It is also possible that "kill/file" paradigm doesn't remove the breakpoints, I don't remember. I usually find that after I recompile a program, old breakpoints are useless, since I've solved the problem they served to pinpoint, and am now after the next bug. So in my experience this is seldom a problem. > I was hoping to use emacs as a pseudo IDE, maybe with the help of > multiple DOS boxes if necessary. How do you veteran Unix-heads work > efficiently, what kind of environments do you set up? It's not clear to me what exactly do you want to know. "IDE" has many different faces, and I don't know which ones do you need. Perhaps you could ask more specific questions. > Or should I just go to Borland? If you are joking, then this is a bad joke ;-)