Leadwerks: GDB Is Annoying; Editor Using GTK

[Ancurio]

http://linux-debugger-bits.blogspot....-on-linux.html

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/09/gabe-newell-linux-is-the-future-of-gaming-new-hardware-coming-soon/

http://www.redditforum.com/threads/594909-valve-working-linux-debugger

http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/val...for_linux.html

Sorry, these sources are useless. All of them describe how Valve is working on LLDB, in the first blog post you linked the author himself even admitted that he quite likes gdb as a standalone program, but that its programming interface is lacking. The only other minuscule "lead" that I was able to find was Valve's statement of how "other game companies often tell them to build a debugger". Hm, I wonder who these "developers" are. Very likely Windows game devs, don't you agree? And what are Windows developers used to? Doing everything from a GUI, ie. integrated debugger in their IDEs. Nowhere did anybody say "GDB sucks, please create a replacement". No, they said "please create a debugger" as if it didn't even exist, leading me to believe that what they're really asking Valve is to build a good graphical debugger. And guess what's very convenient for that? A debugger with a good programming interface. And this is exactly where LLDB shines, because unlike GDB it is very new, based on a modular architecture and thus makes the programming interface part a much easier experience. That is all, nobody is saying "GDB as a standalone debugger is crap".

[Sergio]

Personally, I've had various problems with different versions of GDB, including seg faults and some strange behaviour from time to time, specially in multithreaded programs. Despire this I've managed to get the job done, but have ocasionally looked for alternatives; reliability is not an option when it comes to system tools.

[ArneBab]

Got any sources for that lovely bit of FUD there, Michael?

That?s about what I wanted to ask - given that it is also completely misrepresenting the dev (Josh Klint). The full quote is:

In the meantime, the limitations of GDB are annoying, but I can deal with it.

This does not sound like crap, but rather like small annoyances - which as others in this thread showed are mostly a matter of learning a different style.

[deanjo]

??

Just so you know, running the software doesn't lead you to *any* licensing problems, and as Valve seems willing to release their changes to LLDB, they aren't the ones wanting to close anything up. The expected users are *game* developers, so discard any modifications to GDB or LLDB coming from them, aside from Valve's work. Actually, this article leads me to think you should discard any knowledge on use of the debugger, let alone modifying it.

They may however want to include a modified version for potential engine customers (complete with toolchain) and that is where licensing can become hairy if they do not want to have those improvements/changes made open.

[mrugiero]

They may however want to include a modified version for potential engine customers (complete with toolchain) and that is where licensing can become hairy if they do not want to have those improvements/changes made open.

They, who? Valve? If that's so, you are right, I haven't considered it, because it sounded to me as you were talking about the other game developers modifying it, not Valve. If you mean the other developers, I wouldn't bet on it, as they don't seem capable enough (basing on the silly comments about GDB alone; they are probably capable if they care enough to learn about it) to modify a debugger.

[deanjo]

They, who? Valve? If that's so, you are right, I haven't considered it, because it sounded to me as you were talking about the other game developers modifying it, not Valve. If you mean the other developers, I wouldn't bet on it, as they don't seem capable enough (basing on the silly comments about GDB alone; they are probably capable if they care enough to learn about it) to modify a debugger.

No, I was always referring to Valve.

[peppercats]

I've been using linux for over two years and I still have no idea how to use GDB.
As a game/graphics developer, bring on the valve debugger

[Guest]

They may however want to include a modified version for potential engine customers (complete with toolchain) and that is where licensing can become hairy if they do not want to have those improvements/changes made open.

How does it make GDB a 'crap'? It's a crap, because some stupid company wants to take the code for free and hide modifications from others?

[ArneBab]

After fretting about this again and again the last few hours, this was the last straw. I?m out. I should have learned from the error of the german pirates and should have avoided reading media which is controlled by people who want to destroy what I fight for (sustainable free software).

You now lost a reader and a donator.

For details which I do not want to see disappear here: http://draketo.de/light/english/free...era#last-straw

[mrugiero]

How does it make GDB a 'crap'? It's a crap, because some stupid company wants to take the code for free and hide modifications from others?

When did he state such a thing? He only said that this might be a reason not to fix whatever they dislike (if anything) in GCC, instead of writing their own or using LLDB.
I think almost all of us agreed that nobody, except from Michael, called GDB crap, and a big portion of this people (which includes myself) agreed that it is not even a bad solution.