[bug] [no_name] buffer created and kept after GdbDebugStop

[Narice]

Hi,
a "ghost" buffer is created or kept after stopping gdb with GdbDebugStop or typing directly in the command line "q".

I hope it's easily fixable

[sakhnik]

I'm not sure I understand the issue. One [noname] buffer seems to be present upon nvim launch even without the plugin. Whatever I tried, I couldn't notice any unwanted buffers. Could you please describe the specific steps to reproduce the issue?

[Narice]

I'll try to figure out what's causing it, it might be related to a .vimrc option
could it be related to "set hidden"?

[Narice]

for the steps, I'm exactly doing what you did.
And it's a different one from the startup one.
It adds a new buffer each time I'm leaving gdb.

[sakhnik]

Well, if I'm using test/init.vim, no "ghosts". But as soon as I add set hidden, I experience the issue.
I'm not sure it'd be easy to tackle.

[Narice]

Maybe just disable hidden while in the process of quitting gdb and then re-enabling it
I'll try it later today

[Frederick888]

Sorry for bumping an old issue but it seems this problem is still reproducible in my case. I'm running neovim v0.4.3 with the latest nvim-gdb and indeed I've got set hidden in vimrc. Just thinking out loud here but I wonder whether it's possible to just bwipe the buffers used by nvim-gdb during cleanup?

[sakhnik]

Yes, probably. The plugin could keep track of the buffers specifically opened for the debugger. But the fix will require careful consideration because leaving "ghost" buffers around is a tiny nuisance in comparison to undesirable obliterations. What if a user edits the source code when debugging?

[Frederick888]

@sakhnik Then, again please bear with me just making assumptions here, is it possible to use named buffers for nvim-gdb? They don't need to be actually saved somewhere but only used for bufname matching as somewhat a guard during cleanup, e.g. /tmp/nvim-gdb.session-[0|1|2|...].[src|dbg].

[sakhnik]

I guess this wouldn't be strictly necessary because the plugin could just remember the buffers. Then we could probably distinguish the modified ones from the untouched ones, skip through the unsaved ones etc. I'll have to experiment around.