From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25373 invoked by alias); 16 Jun 2005 23:47:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 25212 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jun 2005 23:47:30 -0000 Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:47:30 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.51) id 1Dj452-0003kd-JR; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 19:47:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:47:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] -stack-select-frame Message-ID: <20050616234728.GA14260@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <17072.62436.183299.55978@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050616044209.GA5907@nevyn.them.org> <17073.5179.249482.402135@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20050616132120.GA5277@nevyn.them.org> <17074.566.194312.713028@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17074.566.194312.713028@farnswood.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00230.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 10:50:30AM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > > My concern was that this added a new item to a response which previous > > had zero. Why do you think people couldn't use it as is? Seems > > perfectly usable to me; if you know the level of a frame you want to > > select, then you probably already have the result of a backtrace which > > includes a printout of the stack frame, so you probably don't need > > another! > > -stack-select-frame without an argument currently works like the CLI command > "frame" without the output. All "frame" does is output the current frame, > so without output its a bit of a no-op. OK, so obviously that's a loss. Either we should: - reject it without an argument - make it print without an argument - make it print always You did the last of those. I'm trying to figure out if other users of -stack-select-frame want that behavior. > > Could you explain why you think we need output here? > > If you have a backtrace then, no, you don't need the output and the frontend > can ignore it. However, I presume "-stack-select-frame" runs more quickly > than "-stack-list-frames" so, if you don't need a backtrace, its probably best > not to require one. We've already got -stack-info-frame. If you want to avoid -stack-list-frames, is it unreasonable to do the two round trips for -stack-select-frame / -stack-info-frame? From Jason's measurements, it sounds like that isn't a problem. Not that it would be a terrible change to print out the frame. It's just a question of whether there's benefit. It'll make -stack-select-frame (again, only marginally) slower. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC