From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 360 invoked by alias); 9 Aug 2005 18:23:26 -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 340 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Aug 2005 18:23:22 -0000 Received: from eastrmmtao06.cox.net (HELO eastrmmtao06.cox.net) (68.230.240.33) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:23:22 +0000 Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by eastrmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050809182318.BUSX1531.eastrmmtao06.cox.net@white>; Tue, 9 Aug 2005 14:23:18 -0400 Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1E2Yky-0000qG-00; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 14:23:20 -0400 Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:23:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: Jim Ingham Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: MI output during program execution Message-ID: <20050809182320.GC3012@white> Mail-Followup-To: Jim Ingham , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <1123605445.30442.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> <20050809175159.GA3012@white> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2005-08/txt/msg00104.txt.bz2 On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:59:25AM -0700, Jim Ingham wrote: > The front end needs to know if a CLI command executed via "- > interpreter-exec console" changed the current thread or frame - so it > can update the UI accordingly. Or if it started the target running. > Or if it added a breakpoint. > > All these things could be queried from existing commands in the MI, > but that's pretty inconvenient and inefficient. It's much easier to > code up the UI if gdb tells it asynchronously about these things. OK, well then I completly agree that observers would be a very nice way to solve this problem. When an internal MI state changes, it should alert the FE if the FE requested such knowledge. This is of course, an asyncronous approach as far as the FE is concerned. If the FE needs this information now, it can simply poll GDB for this information. Also, I'm not convinced it would be inefficient to query GDB for the required information, especially if a new MI command was added to GDB that returned the current state of GDB. (frame,thread,file). How does -interpreter-exec console work in the case when the user executes a command, that makes up several other commands? define mess_with_mi_people b main r n n end I don't think this case would currently work as expected. Would it? Thanks, Bob Rossi