Re: [PATCH] Another annotation for threads

Daniel Jacobowitz
2008-06-05T21:26:37Z

On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 09:20:06AM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote:
> > > If this patch is OK, I will submit a similar one for MI using an observer.
> >
> > It's quite likely that I've gotten turned around in all the discussion
> > while I was away, and you've already answered this. But here's my
> > question anyway: if there's going to be an observer to do this in MI,
> > why shouldn't annotate.c use the same observer to call
> > annotate_thread_changed?
>
> For the same reason that the "new-thread" annotation was eventually done
> without annotations: GDB/MI developers might decide to call it at other
> locations.
>
> Also it means it has the same idiom as all the other annotations and, on it's
> own, it's a simple change that's not very intrusive.

I don't find that very convincing, but the patch is OK.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery