From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18594 invoked by alias); 13 Aug 2005 21:41:49 -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 18560 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Aug 2005 21:41:45 -0000 Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Sat, 13 Aug 2005 21:41:45 +0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j7DLfQUo006127; Sat, 13 Aug 2005 23:41:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j7DLfQke012008; Sat, 13 Aug 2005 23:41:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id j7DLfLAW019994; Sat, 13 Aug 2005 23:41:21 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 21:52:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200508132141.j7DLfLAW019994@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: drow@false.org CC: jingham@apple.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, eliz@gnu.org In-reply-to: <20050813050414.GA7717@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Sat, 13 Aug 2005 01:04:14 -0400) Subject: Re: RFC: MI output during program execution References: <20050809223421.GB3557@white> <20050810004128.GA4264@nevyn.them.org> <20050810004826.GD3557@white> <2040BEEA-4200-4118-91EB-D093ED4D37A1@apple.com> <20050812012810.GA10011@white> <29EA180F-E3C7-4D04-B500-655391EDA2D9@apple.com> <20050813002230.GA11892@white> <20050813011542.GC11892@white> <20050813050414.GA7717@nevyn.them.org> X-SW-Source: 2005-08/txt/msg00162.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 01:04:14 -0400 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > Or do as I described earlier today, and add a new mechanism > specifically designed to notify interpreters of events that could be > interesting (which might meet Eli's concerns about misusing observers, > but we'd have to ask him!), or else call into the MI interpreter > directly from the code without messing with any kind of mechanism. Let's not add any new mechanisms before we've removed all traces of the deprecated ones shall we? Mark