On Sep 20, 2013, at 8:54 AM, Michael Jackson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sep 19, 2013, at 5:35 PM, André Pönitz > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 01:19:13PM -0700, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote: >>> If GDB can support code coming from clang-llvm, perhaps a simpler interim >>> solution would be to build and ship a copy of gdb in the OSX bundle for >>> QtCreator? >> >> I don't really think that's a viable option, certainly not one that >> requires less work than bringing real LLDB support up to snuff. We used to >> ship "usable GDB builds" for Windows a while ago when the MinGW builds >> where lacking scripting support and the whole process was a huge sink of >> ressources. I'd rather not repeat that, for various reasons. >> >> LLDB exposes a lot of its innards to its Python bindings in a >> straight-forward >> manner, so it's really just cobbling "a few" things together. Really no >> rocket science. On side provides a full debugger, the other side needs >> a full debugger, missing are only (some of the) connections. >> >> Documentation could be a bit better (where not...), so one doesn't end up >> in dead ends too often, but in general it's a predictable and rewarding >> environment to work in. I'd rather spend energy moving forward than to >> maintain last year's status quo. >> >> Andre' > > Thanks all for the comments, I'm going to add my own 2 cents worth since I am > a "glass is half empty" kind of person but also a realist. > > OS X 10.9 Mavericks will most likely require Xcode 5. Based on History this > will probably hold true although I really hope I am wrong. Why? Because > without a viable debugger in QtCreator under Xcode 5 anyone upgrading to OS X > 10.9 Mavericks will basically render QtCreator useless for Debugging. You can > still compile and run, just not debug. Now it sounds like QtCreator is > getting close to a release so the LLDB support will not be in there. And the > project needs some programmers to help write all the glue code and then test > everything. I'll bet this takes until next summer to get completed. I'm not > placing blame anywhere, just my opinion based on the comments in here about > finding the time to write the codes. So for those that are using QtCreator > but want to run the latest and greatest OS X you have 2 choices: > > 1: Run OS X 10.9 but have NO debugger. > 2: Run OS X 10.8 and have a debugger. > > There are a few other possible options: > 1: The programmer can attempt to compile a newer GDB but from my googling > that seems to go nowhere and just does not work. > 2: Purchase a commercial debugger like Intels IDB which I thought was "GDB > Compatible". Which makes me wonder if one can swap IDG for GDB and QtCreator > will know the difference? Comments on this idea? > > > Thanks to all > --- > Mike Jackson > I will answer some of my own questions. Based on http://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/article/407601/release-notes-c-2013sp1-m-en.pdf One rather expensive solution is to purchase the intel compilers which come with GDB version 7.5.x and require python so it looks as if this would meet all the requirements that QtCreator needs. Do I *like* this solution? Nope. I think $800 USD for a compiler is a bit insane but then the windows side of the world seems to think this is OK, with respect to the price of Visual Studio Pro. The release notes also mention that IDB is going to be deprecated in the future. What would be nice would be to get Intel to release just the GDB binaries then this mess would be solved, at least until the LLDB codes got up to snuff. Cheers -- Mike Jackson _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
