I'm certainly looking forward to taking a proper gander at it, as I'm
all for supporting people exploring the internals of development, and if
it proves to be extremely flexible and useful, you'll get a vote from
me, but have to see it in action first!
Gareth aka. Kit
On 23/02/2026 01:30, Graeme Geldenhuys via fpc-devel wrote:
On 2026-02-22 18:11, Kostas Michalopoulos via fpc-devel wrote:
...so i do not think that dropping DWARF support is a good idea.
To be very clear, I have no intention of suggesting we drop DWARF
support. As others have noted, its external tooling support is massive
and essential.
My research into debugger internals simply led me to a "what if"
scenario: I realised how much easier things could be using a more
Pascal-like approach on both the compiler and client sides. By using
simple, descriptive Pascal records that are easily extensible, the
architecture remains remarkably clean. So far, that theory has held up
well.
Every time I've envisioned a new feature, it has been trivial to add.
Also, because I've designed the debug engine using the Ports &
Adapters (Hexagonal) pattern, adding IDE support or external tooling
requires very little effort. As a proof of concept, my reference CLI
debugger is a single-unit application of only 530 lines, including
comments.
I am very close to making the code public for review and feedback; I
just have one or two last-minute items I'd like to polish before
sharing it. I was just so excited to see the architecture taking shape
that I thought I would reveal what's coming a few days early. I look
forward to hearing everyone's thoughts once the source is up.
Regards,
- Graeme -
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
