From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] 09/10 Add "continue --all"
Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 03:54:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200805090307.47327.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080509014720.GB22833@caradoc.them.org>
A Friday 09 May 2008 02:47:20, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 02:36:09AM +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > And after a bit, it hit me that we use /opt most everywhere
> > else, so "continue /a" makes more sense?
>
> I don't know; personally I do not like it. The other slashed options
> are all output formatting, even Doug's new /m for disassemble. This
> one is behavior, not option.
>
> Does continue have to handle all threads at once, or is this similar
> to "thread apply all continue"?
It's basically the same. I mentioned that upthread.
> We could alias all -> thread apply
> all.
I love the sound of that! "all continue". Perfect.
There's just one difference. "continue --all" resumes all
threads and prints "Continuing." once, while "all continue" would print
that (or whatever we change it too) once per resuming thread. That may
actually be better, unless we wanted to compress the output, like
Continuing all threads
or
Continuing thread 2,3,5,7,8,...,20
vs
Continuing thread 2
Continuing thread 3
Continuing thread 5
Continuing thread 7
Continuing thread ...
Continuing thread 20
But "all continue", "all interrupt", "all ..." seems so perfect that
I'm for all it.
Others?
--
Pedro Alves
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-09 2:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-06 18:12 Pedro Alves
2008-05-07 11:58 ` Pierre Muller
2008-05-07 19:36 ` Pedro Alves
2008-05-08 18:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
2008-05-09 2:35 ` Pedro Alves
2008-05-09 3:08 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-05-09 3:54 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2008-05-09 17:07 ` Pedro Alves
2008-05-09 19:08 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-05-09 19:20 ` Andrew STUBBS
2008-05-11 20:34 ` Joel Brobecker
2008-05-19 17:07 ` Pedro Alves
2008-05-19 21:29 ` Michael Snyder
2008-05-19 21:55 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-05-19 22:46 ` Andreas Schwab
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200805090307.47327.pedro@codesourcery.com \
--to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
--cc=drow@false.org \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox