harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oliver Deakin <oliver.dea...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [GSoC] Proposal For jdb command line debugger tool.
Date Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:47:26 GMT
I see your point about performance, and of course the proposal is yours 
:) However I would put forward the following arguments in favour of 
using Java and JDI:
 - JDI is _the_ spec'ed public API for Java debugging, JDWP only 
describes the protocol. To write a jdb tool that uses JDWP directly 
sounds a lot like you will end up rewriting JDI in C code before 
actually writing the jdb tool, and that is not the remit for the 
project. Rewriting an API that already exists in Java (and is supported 
by another project - Eclipse) does not sound like a good idea.
 - JDI provides a solid spec to code to. You can take a JDI based agent 
to another Java runtime and it should work, so any additional function 
you add to the new jdb tool will immediately be available to use on all 
runtimes by launching your tool on that runtime.
 - I would argue that performance for a command line debugger is not a 
major issue. In a GUI environment, where multiple stack traces, variable 
displays and other data are being refreshed regularly, performance would 
be more important. However, in the simplified command line environment 
the need for super-fast processing of packets becomes a non-issue as 
there is so much less going on simultaneously.
 - A Java based tool is a lot more portable and easier to maintain. We 
also already have an intelligent launcher setup in Harmony which will 
automatically launch your executable Java class for a tool, so going 
down the Java route will fit neatly into the tools design we already 
have in the project.

I hope you can see my point about JDWP vs. JDI for this tool. Good luck 
writing the proposal - don't forget the deadline is tomorrow!

Regards,
Oliver

WenDong Zhang wrote:
> Hi Oliver:
>
> We did consider implementing this tool based on JDI, we have a
> misunderstanding on between C/C++'s efficiency and Java's usability
> for this project. We considered the implementation too extremely,
> there is a long chain from JVMTI to JDB: JVMTI - JDWP - JDI - JDB.
> JDI encapsulate JDWP and we don't need to care about the protocol
> detail: command, package, data type and so on. Maybe we should use the
> software architecture's principle: add a midware to our implements to
> decouple the dependence and more transparent to users even it may
> cause a few of efficient problems.
>
> 2009/4/1 Oliver Deakin <oliver.deakin@googlemail.com>:
>   
>> Hi, and welcome to Harmony!
>>
>> hu jing wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>>    I am interested in the "jdb command line debugger tool". I find Sun jdb
>>>
>>>       
>> Great!
>>     
>>> is not very friendly to developers. I want to add some useful function to
>>> this tool. Such as, Auto-complete command line, smart format for the user
>>> input. And we can also supply some interfaces to further development.
>>>    Wen Dong(zwd2005@gmail.com) and I want to participate in this tool
>>> development. We are from the same laboratory of the Department of Computer
>>> Science of Nanjing University. We worked together for two years and now we
>>> are both interns in IBM CDL. I think we can work out the debugger tool
>>> pretty.
>>>
>>>       
>> I don't know what the rules are for co-working on a project - I believe each
>> project has to be an individual effort. You could ask on the GSoC discussion
>> mailing list (mailing lists and other useful info can be found here [1]).
>>
>>     
>>>    The popular architecture is JPDA(Java Platform Debugger Architecture).
>>> JPDA contains three parts: JVMTI, JDWP and JDI. JVMTI(Java Virtual Machine
>>> Tool Interface) supply a set of native interface supplied by JVM. The
>>> development based on the JVMTI level is complex and hard to be extended
>>> and
>>> modified. JDWP supplies a standard protocol for the communication between
>>> the debugger and debuggee. And it also provides the socket interface. JDI
>>> is
>>> debug interface. It is mostly implemented in Java. JVMTI and JDWP are
>>> based
>>> native code. We want to implement the java command line debugger tool in
>>> C/C++ considering efficiency. We will use JDWP interface for development
>>> efficiency and Portability.
>>>
>>>       
>> Have you considered coding the tool in Java and using JDI to access all the
>> required functions? I think it will be more portable, easier to maintain,
>> and will fit more naturally with the other command line tools we have in
>> Harmony.
>>
>>     
>>>    The following is our main idea for this tool:
>>>
>>>    1.format the user input.
>>>    2.validate the command arguments.
>>>    3.Create connection between debugger and JVM, and here we can use the
>>> JDWP Transport Interface. Based on the JDWP, We create packages containing
>>> the command information and send packages to JVM by using the transport
>>> interface. JVM will process these packages and send the feedback to the
>>> debugger. And we will process this information.
>>>    4.print the message on the console.
>>>
>>>
>>> Schedule:
>>>       We can work 20 hours each week.
>>>       April 4 ~ April 30: Be family with JDWP and JDWP Transport
>>> Interface.
>>>       May 1 ~ May 22: meet our mentors, read the documentation and get
>>> some
>>> suggestions from our mentors.
>>>       May 23 ~ May 30: to determine the final framework and algorithm
>>> details, divide the work with my partners.
>>>       June 1 ~ June 30: coding.
>>>       July 1 ~ July 5: integration, test and debug for mid-term
>>> evaluations.
>>>       July 6 ~ August 11: process the debug, documentation and
>>> integration.
>>>       August 12 ~ August 24: write test unit, debug and final release.
>>>
>>>       
>> Looks like a good plan. You need to clear up the issue of working with a
>> partner - if that is a possibility, or you can decide on one of you to work
>> on the project alone, then please draft a submission in the GSoC tool [2] as
>> soon as possible. The deadline for submissions is Friday 3rd April.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Oliver
>>
>> [1] http://socghop.appspot.com/document/show/program/google/gsoc2009/faqs
>> [2] http://socghop.appspot.com/
>>
>>     
>>> Jing Hu , WenDong Zhang.
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> --
>> Oliver Deakin
>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
>> 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
>> PO6 3AU
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Oliver Deakin
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU


Mime
View raw message