From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29481 invoked by alias); 21 Oct 2008 18:18:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 29473 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Oct 2008 18:18:22 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:17:42 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7562D10700; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:17:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (209.195.188.212.nauticom.net [209.195.188.212]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 332D310199; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:17:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KsLnX-0002nD-Cv; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:17:39 -0400 Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:18:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Ulrich Weigand Cc: Thiago Jung Bauermann , Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] add struct parse_context to all command functions Message-ID: <20081021181739.GA10391@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ulrich Weigand , Thiago Jung Bauermann , Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20081021004630.GA6571@caradoc.them.org> <200810211805.m9LI5Lt0014410@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200810211805.m9LI5Lt0014410@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00512.txt.bz2 On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:05:21PM +0200, Ulrich Weigand wrote: > FWIW I'd also prefer this option. Listening to Tom talk about this I've started to wonder if it's necessary... do we have a unified vision on where the global state accesses are OK? GDB is single threaded. I anticipate it will remain so. So, having the functions which implement user interface commands read global state doesn't seem like a big problem - unlike the expression parser. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery