Re: [PATCH v4 2/9] add "this" pointers to more target APIs

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> writes:

Pedro> On 10/28/2013 04:37 PM, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> 
>> It is all moot, I think.  There is no reason for linux-nat to ever call
>> linux_nat_is_async_p any more.  I think we can drop all the dead code
>> instead.  I noted this in the first submission and said I will do it in
>> a followup; but I think I'll just tack it on to this series instead.

Pedro> I'd rather keep the code to allow forcing sync mode for a while,
Pedro> to make it easier to debug problems and compare modes.

With this series, there's no way to force sync mode.

I think maybe it could be done by adding a new "maint" setting.

We can't reuse "set target-async" due to the MI misuse, unless we're
willing to change the default setting of this parameter based on the
current interpreter.  In fact an earlier version of my patch series did
just this, but IIRC I thought it was too hackish.


While we're here, I wonder now whether the distinction between "can
async" and "is async" makes sense any more.  I'm inclined to remove one
of them.

Tom