Re: Stand resume() on its head

Kevin Buettner
2002-11-05T20:46:58Z

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.)

Kevin