Re: GDB MI Reverse Commands added [3 of 3]

[Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>]

Jakob Engblom wrote:

>> Also, I would appreciate if this:
>>
>>     # Test exec-reverse-next
>>     # FIXME: Why does it take 2 next commands to get back to the
>>     #        previous line?
>>
>> were somehow addressed. I am not familiar with details of reverse behaviour,
> so I
>> did not even try to check that the tested commands and locations, etc, are
> right.
> 
> Since this is tested on top of process record, I think I am not the best person
> to answer... but in general, what tends to happen in reverse in my experience is
> this:
> 
> We have lines of code (or instructions)
> 
> A
> B
> 
> And we stop with a breakpoint in line B.
> 
> We are then at the end of B, or in the middle of B, in the execution.

Let's say lines of code, then -- it doesn't generally make sense to be
stopped in the middle of an instruction.

So to make sure we are on the same page -- we've stopped at a
breakpoint in the *MIDDLE* of line B?

> Then, doing reverse one step/instruction/line will move you to the start of B. 
> 
> And another step/instruction/line moves you to before A was executed. 
> 
> Does that make sense for process record?

It does under the assumptions that I named above.

I suppose if we were talking about instructions that can be
interrupted in the middle, it might make sense there too.