Re: RFC: target_create_inferior that does not call proceed

[Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>]

> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:02:38 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> 
> You'll notice that the call to observer_notify_inferior_created
> is removed from several target methods, and moved to the end of
> run_command_1.  Consequently it's no longer possible to accidentally forget
> about a target - as we've obviously done for most of the targets I changed
> here.  Less duplication is good!

Yay!

> I'll be needing to run some additional common code fragments between
> creating an inferior and starting it, for an upcoming project.  Like most of
> GDB they need the target to be stopped; that's why I separated the create
> and proceed phases here.

That's the reason why you created post_create_inferior?  If yes, then,
that answers the next question: Why did you introduce post_create_inferior?

> Another benefit of this is that I could finally implement a command I've
> wanted for ages when debugging startup code: create the inferior but don't
> run it, and give me my prompt back.  That's not in this patch only because I
> couldn't think of a name for it!  I'd call it "start", but well... already
> in use.  Would anyone else find this useful?  If so, would you care to
> suggest a name?

I vaguely remember there was a way to do that already, but when I last
wanted to use it, I couldn't find a way to do it.  So yes, I'd welcome
such a command.  Perhaps we could have something like:

(gdb) set stop-on-entry 1

after which "run" or "start" would stop at the entry point?

Mark