Re: GUD octave support

[John W. Eaton]

On 11-Dec-2007, Nick Roberts wrote:

|  > ...
|  > | This is more lightweight than GUD, and I think that the idea is that the
|  > | user interacts with Python in a shell buffer in the normal way (a bit 
like
|  > | he would with Octave after run-octave).  Then if he wants to start
|  > | debugging a script he can do this just by importing pdb and using 
pdb.run.
|  > | 
|  > | However, this would require more work in Emacs than just using GUD.
|  > 
|  > I don't understand this part.  Doesn't the GUD mode of Emacs have to
|  > start Octave?  As part of the initialization, and instead of using a
|  > command-line option, can't it send a command to Octave to set the
|  > special output format?
| 
| I'm not sure which part "this part" refers to as you quoted all of my message.

I didn't understand why it "would require more work in Emacs than just
using GUD" since I thought we were discussing using GUD, and I was
only suggesting using a function instead of a command-line option. 

| Emacs could indeed send a special command to Octave when it starts up in
| GUD mode but what would be the advantage of this over using a special option
| in the command name?

If a function can do the job, then I'm not sure a command-line option
is needed.

jwe