From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-46713-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 6748 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2006 22:28:26 -0000
Received: (qmail 6733 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Dec 2006 22:28:25 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:28:14 +0000
Received: from kahikatea.snap.net.nz (p202-124-120-96.snap.net.nz [202.124.120.96]) 	by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 981FE2F40F8; 	Fri, 22 Dec 2006 11:29:43 +1300 (NZDT)
Received: by kahikatea.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 500) 	id 62FF5BE457; Fri, 22 Dec 2006 11:23:34 +1300 (NZDT)
From: Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <17803.2404.969452.883622@kahikatea.snap.net.nz>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:28:00 -0000
To: Vladimir Prus <ghost@cs.msu.su>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFC: MI - Detecting change of string contents with variable objects
In-Reply-To: <E1GxPnE-00056s-AN@zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su>
References: <17797.65268.689590.797944@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> 	<17799.3497.476593.138858@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> 	<E1GxPnE-00056s-AN@zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su>
X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 22.0.92.1
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2006-12/txt/msg00294.txt.bz2

 > Why do you need the value_get_print_value function? I think that the right
 > semantic of -var-update is that it returns all such variable objects for
 > which the -var-evaluate-expression will return different value before and
 > after -var-update. -var-evaluate-expression is the only way to get a value
 > of varobj, so we should be using that, not some similar but different
 > function.
 > 
 > In order words, why can't you just call varobj_get_value instead of
 > introducing and calling a new function? 

Because -var-evaluate-expression uses varobj_get_value so they will always
return the same value?

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob