From: dje@google.com
To: Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>, <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] new memory-changed MI notification.
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 17:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20604.20161.315324.841784@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5073D5B5.2060208@codesourcery.com>
Yao Qi writes:
> On 09/29/2012 01:17 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > Usually I think it would be preferable to have a flag correspond to a
> > notification and not a command; but this would not work so well if a
> > command needed to suppress two different messages. (Though if that
> > happens then maybe we should have a slightly different approach based on
> > bitmasks.)
> >
>
> I agree with you that one flag should correspond to a notification. I
> revised my patch a little bit to get rid of suppression flag
> 'var_assign'.
Hi.
For my own education, is this suppression just an optimization, or is there a correctness issue here?
I can imagine that it's an optimization, why notify the frontend something changed when it's the frontend that requested the change.
But there is *zero* documentation in mi-main.h on *why* struct mi_suppress_notification exists, so it's hard to tell. :-(
[I realize your patch is just adding an entry, but I'd like to learn what the reason for it is.]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-15 17:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-28 0:49 [RFC 0/2] Two new MI notifications Yao Qi
2012-09-28 0:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] new memory-changed MI notification Yao Qi
2012-09-28 7:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-09-28 7:58 ` Yao Qi
2012-09-28 8:25 ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-09-28 17:17 ` Tom Tromey
2012-09-29 1:18 ` Yao Qi
2012-10-09 7:44 ` Yao Qi
2012-10-15 17:58 ` dje [this message]
2012-10-15 19:07 ` Tom Tromey
2012-10-16 7:12 ` Yao Qi
2012-10-15 19:03 ` Tom Tromey
2012-09-28 0:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] new tracepoint downloaded " Yao Qi
2012-09-28 7:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-09-28 17:44 ` Pedro Alves
2012-09-28 17:47 ` Pedro Alves
2012-09-29 14:13 ` Yao Qi
2012-10-09 8:12 ` Yao Qi
2012-10-31 17:59 ` Pedro Alves
2012-10-31 19:20 ` Doug Evans
2012-11-01 0:34 ` Yao Qi
2012-11-02 15:46 ` Pedro Alves
2012-11-02 15:50 ` Pedro Alves
2012-10-18 1:16 ` Yao Qi
2012-10-18 1:28 ` Yao Qi
2012-10-30 7:07 ` [ping]: " Yao Qi
2012-10-30 17:22 ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-10-18 4:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-10-18 19:54 ` Tom Tromey
2012-09-28 17:44 ` Pedro Alves
2012-09-28 18:27 ` Tom Tromey
2012-09-28 18:29 ` Tom Tromey
2012-10-15 18:03 ` dje
2012-10-31 18:03 ` Pedro Alves
2012-10-31 19:10 ` Marc Khouzam
2012-11-01 0:22 ` Yao Qi
2012-11-22 18:33 ` Pedro Alves
2012-11-29 15:47 ` Yao Qi
2012-11-29 16:00 ` Pedro Alves
2012-11-29 19:34 ` Marc Khouzam
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=20604.20161.315324.841784@ruffy2.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=dje@google.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=yao@codesourcery.com \
/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