Re: Patch for gdb/mi problem 702

["J. Johnston" <jjohnstn@redhat.com>]

Keith Seitz wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, J. Johnston wrote:
> 
> > Some of these output variables are aliases of one another
> > (e.g. *p which points to a[5] which is also being shown).  The application
> > kicks off a separate input field operation that changes the value of a[5].
> > Now, the application knows it changed a[5], but doesn't necessarily know about
> > the current alias to *p.
> 
> You'll also get a target_changed event. This will cause the UI to run
> -var-update, which will show that the "aliased" object's value has
> changed. This already works in insight.
> 
> Keith

Yes, but the UI won't see the original value that got changed.  So, if you are going to get
the cost of a -var-update anyway, why not add the value that just got changed
and thereby make the code simpler?  Otherwise, the setter of the value
must go and cause a refresh of the changed value in addition to the normal code that will 
trigger due to a target_changed event.  Am I missing something here?

-- Jeff J.