From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12508 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2008 20:55:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 12429 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Oct 2008 20:55:12 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (HELO smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com) (65.115.85.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Oct 2008 20:54:36 +0000 Received: from mailhost3.vmware.com (mailhost3.vmware.com [10.16.27.45]) by smtp-outbound-2.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85DAE47002; Wed, 8 Oct 2008 13:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.20.92.59] (promb-2s-dhcp59.eng.vmware.com [10.20.92.59]) by mailhost3.vmware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B694C9A17; Wed, 8 Oct 2008 13:54:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48ED1D87.5020101@vmware.com> Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 20:55:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20080411) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thiago Jung Bauermann CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [RFA] Resubmit reverse debugging [5/5] References: <48EC18F9.8040105@vmware.com> <1223489663.19088.43.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1223496839.19088.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1223496839.19088.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00258.txt.bz2 Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > Also, will there be anything added to reverse.c in the future? If not, > IMHO it's easier just to put these command definitions and setup in > infcmd.c, next to their forward counterparts. My thought is that it's better to guess "yes" than "no" to your question. There are some number of things we already know that we haven't addressed (async, multi-threads...), and any number that we may not have thought of yet.