python - GDB pretty-print : returning string from a children()'s iterator, 但显示为 char[]

Question

我有一个方便的类，它允许我轻松地将一组“summariser”函​​数添加到 GDB pretty-print (例如，一个 Rect 类可以有一个 [ Area] 字段，由 Python 计算)。然后它还会打印所有现有的子项，因此您可以立即看到所有内容。

class SummaryAndFieldIterator:
    """
    Iterator to first go through a list of summariser functions,
    then display all the fields in the object in order
    """
    def __init__ (self, obj, summaries):
        self.count = 0
        self.obj = obj;
        self.summaries = summaries;
        self.keys = sorted(obj.type.iterkeys())

    def __iter__(self):
        return self

    def __next__(self):

        if (self.count >= len(self.keys) + len(self.summaries)):
            raise StopIteration
        elif self.count < len(self.summaries):

            name, retVal = self.summaries[self.count](self.obj)
            # FIXME: this doesn't seem to work when a string is returned
            # in retVal?
            result = "[%s]" % name, retVal

        else:
            field = self.count - len(self.summaries)
            result = self.keys[field], self.obj[self.keys[field]]

        self.count += 1
        return result

    next = __next__

class MyObjectPrinter:

    def __init__(self, val):
        self.val = val

    def get_int(self):
        return "meaning", 42

    def get_string(self):
        return "hoopiness", "Forty-two"

    def children(self):
        return SummaryAndFieldIterator(self.val, [self.get_string])

这对于返回数值的摘要器非常有效，但对于字符串，它最终显示为一个数组，所以我得到

NAME                 VALUE
myobj                {..}
 |-->[meaning]      42
 |-->[hoopiness] 
      |-->[0]       'F'
      |-->[1]       'o'
       .....
 |-->real_field     34234

这大概是因为字符串来自

name, retVal = self.summaries[self.count](self.obj)

当SummaryAndFieldIterator 的__next__ 方法返回时，

不会生成足够“字符串”的gdb.Value 对象。调整 MyObjectPrinter 的 display_hint() 方法似乎没有任何效果(但我怀疑它会不会，因为这是 child ，而不是对象)。

有人知道如何从 children() 迭代器返回一个字符串并将其显示为字符串吗？

Answer 1

好吧，显然这可能是一个与 GDB/MI 与 pretty-print 通信方式相关的错误，Bugzilla 在此处创建:https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18282