Re: Is anyone using gud?
Rick Campbell <campbell(a)cyberpass.net> writes in xemacs-beta(a)xemacs.org:
I use it sometimes. It's pretty bad, but sometimes it's the
only
choice when dealing with SparcWorks C++.
O.K. "Bad but usable" doesn't sound like a burning reason to trash it.
gdb-mode isn't practical because of name mangling issues, and
painful as it is, I prefer running dbx through gud than any other
interface I've tried. If there's a better way to run dbx in emacs
-- especially if it looks a lot like gdb-mode, *please* let me
know.
There's the Sparcworks stuff.
I've done a minimal[1] port of gud.el from Emacs 20.3 but there are
enough issues[2] with it to defer integration until post 21.0.
Footnotes:
[1] GUIless.
[2] It requires a different version of speedbar than the one we have,
and it will require a change to etags.el for sdb support.