From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24123 invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2005 22:35:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24110 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Jun 2005 22:35:05 -0000 Received: from mail-out3.apple.com (HELO mail-out3.apple.com) (17.254.13.22) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Jun 2005 22:35:05 +0000 Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (a17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out3.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j5HMZ3ET008612 for ; Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:35:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay1.apple.com (relay1.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.17) with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:35:02 -0700 Received: from [17.219.206.80] ([17.219.206.80]) by relay1.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j5HMZ0ai018502; Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:35:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <42B35013.60008@apple.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 22:35:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040910 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Roberts CC: Jason Molenda , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] -stack-select-frame References: <17072.62436.183299.55978@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <50B12BF2-9C7D-43ED-AF21-D1EA42AC7115@apple.com> <17074.1440.40908.588287@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <412387CD-8F52-46E0-865F-560543C1E757@apple.com> <17074.31377.996795.526839@farnswood.snap.net.nz> In-Reply-To: <17074.31377.996795.526839@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00263.txt.bz2 Nick Roberts wrote: >[Jason - Sorry if you get this twice. My first message bounced at RedHat, for >some reason.] > > > > I thought it would save some time if the user doesn't need to see the > > > whole stack. > > > > FWIW we've done a lot of careful timing analysis, and the back & > > forth communication between our GUI and gdb is so fast as to be > > pointless to optimize. We original considered adding special purpose > > "give Xcode everything it needs to know at a breakpoint hit" type > > commands but when we saw how fast the majority of MI commands can > > execute & be parsed by the GUI, it was obvious that this was not a > > useful area to optimize. And frankly, in my anecdotal experience, > > MacOS X isn't the fastest OS at things like "two processes talking > > over a pipe". > >You've clearly been more quantitative. With my limited resources, I'm >just guessing what might work best. I've suggested to Daniel a change >that, I hope, won't impact on Xcode. I think you have your own copy >of GDB and, like you say, you don't really care, but I guess its best >not to diverge more than necessary. > Ideally, future versions of Apple GDB will be much more like FSF GDB. I'm hip-deep in a merge right now, and adding lots of local markers so we can pick out candidate patches more easily; once all that's done, we should be able to start contributing more (starting with the basic Darwin native bits, it's a nuisance to have to use other configs to test even trivial patches). Stan