Re: GUD octave support

[Shai Ayal]

On Dec 11, 2007 10:25 AM, Nick Roberts <address@hidden> wrote:
>  > 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.
>
> Pdbtrack is different to GUD in the way I tried to explain.  Making Octave
> in Emacs work like Pdbtrack would require more work because Pdbtrack is not
> part of Emacs as we have not been able to get all authors to sign papers
> for Emacs
>
>  > | 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.
>
> I'm still not sure what the advantage would be but the choice is clearly
> yours.  If Octave can be made to output the absolute file name and line
> number in a formal way similar to the one I've described then Emacs can
> surely be made to display the file in a buffer at the relevant line.

What is still not clear to me is:
Does GUD mode require a command line switch to enable the special
octave prompt or is it possible the GUD mode send a command to octave
upon startup which will set the octave prompt.

If GUD supports both the command line and sending an octave command,
then we can start arguing about the merits of these approaches.

Shai