Re: Re-initializing a list after the control returns to gdb...

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>]

>> The code relies on global state so I think `target changed' is better - 
>> that way you know that your state is up-to-date.  From memory, right now 
>> we've actually memory_changed and registers_changed (I think they should 
>> be merged).  There is also a target run hook that insight uses.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately `target changed' does not trigger at least every time
> I need it to. I looked at the code, and it should basically trigger
> everytime we change some data in memory. 

Yes.

> A quick attempt with "set debug event 1" shows that the only events
> I see in a simple "break; run" sequence are breakpoint events...
> 
> 
>> That's the problem (you said sick), we've three:
>> - gdb-events
>> - chained hooks
>> - simple hooks
>> gdb-events started on the problem but lost direction.
> 
> 
> I like the events mechanism, it's a paradigm that's used very widely.
> But the gdb-event mechanism does not seem to allow several clients
> subscribing for these events at the same time. This mechanism is
> then very close to the simple hooks.

That's why I used the word `observer'.  When gdb-events was written (ok 
when I hacked it up) I wasn't sure if it should be all (observer) or one 
(as it is now).

In hindsite, it needs to be converted to an observer model (or a new 
observer model introduced and the current gdb-hooks changed to one of 
the many observers).

> I am therefore thinking of implementing a new chained hook in place
> of the direct call to ada_read_tasks_list. Would that be an acceptable
> solution?

Have a look at insight's gdb/gdbtk/generic/gdbtk-hooks.c for what it uses.

Andrew