Re: Stand resume() on its head

Andrew Cagney
2002-11-05T22:57:51Z

> On Nov 5, 3:28pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>
>> There have now been several discussion threads that lead to the
>> conclusion that
>>
>> target->resume (ptid_t, int, enum target_signal)
>>
>> needs changing. At present the suggestion is to add a parameter to
>> indicate schedule locking and similar operations.
>>
>> I'd like to propose a different approach. Instead of passing to
>> resume() what to do, have resume() iterate over all the threads asking
>> each what it should do - suspend, step, run, signal, ...
>
>
> Sounds reasonable. (In fact, it seems a whole lot more workable than
> the other approach.)

Yep, figure out the worst case and solve that - then discover that the
solution is better than the other partial approaches :-)

Andrew