From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@gnat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Re-initializing a list after the control returns to gdb...
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 15:57:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E5C5CBD.2030201@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030225013722.GM910@gnat.com>
> [Sorry for answering late, got preempted...]
>
>
>> 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).
>
>
> One model that works extremely well is the signals system implemented in
> glib. I find it very nicely done. It would be nice if we could reuse
> this, but this is a very very complex machinery doing probably way too
> much for what we need in GDB.
Yes. GDB just needs a single consistent event mechanism.
> I would instead suggest something much more simple, like this:
>
> enum notice_kinds
> {
> breakpoint_created_notice,
> breakpoint_deleted_notice,
> ...
> invalid_last_notice, /* Should always be last. */
> };
gdb-events.sh used individual wrapper functions rather than trusting an
enum, a void *, and dodgy casts. This was to ensure that the external
iterfaces were all strongly typed (calls checked with -Werror) and all
nasty casts were burried in the .c file.
It did that right.
It, however, made several mistakes:
- it tried to group all the events together (you've proposed individual
registration which is much more incremental)
- it didn't implement broadcast (as proposed here)
- `event' in GDB has multiple meanings so the name is confusing.
So, can you get a prototype observer working for just your ada event
(but keep in mind that other events will be boiler-plated)?
As for the names, just use the terminology found in the patterns book -
observer.[hc]. observer_update_xxx (or notify_xxx),
observer_attach_xxx, observer_detach_xxx I think. If GDB needs more
than one observer, there's a problem.
(oh, unless you've an immediate need for that data/context parameter,
i'd leave it out - such a mechanis can be left to the person that
actually needs)
(shh, doco - but I have a cunning plan - see my recent post about
revamping gdbarch.sh into doc/gdbarch.texi).
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-26 15:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-19 2:01 Joel Brobecker
2003-02-19 12:47 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-02-19 16:05 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-02-19 16:49 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-02-19 17:46 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-02-19 17:01 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-02-19 17:50 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-02-19 18:05 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-02-19 19:24 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-02-19 20:30 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-02-25 1:37 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-02-26 15:57 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-02-27 7:13 ` Joel Brobecker
2003-02-27 18:44 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-02-28 7:42 ` Joel Brobecker
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=3E5C5CBD.2030201@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=brobecker@gnat.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.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