Re: Patch for gdb/mi problem 702

J. Johnston
2002-10-04T19:26:39Z

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.