Re: [PATCH] MI: new timing command

Nick Roberts
2007-01-01T04:07:29Z

> > >> > But as a last resort it returns elapsed time which would be wrong.
> > >>
> > >> You keep saying this but I don't see why. Why is it wrong? On every
> > >> platform where we can do it, we'll print usage; on platforms where we
> > >> can't do it, the odds are pretty good that the OS isn't aggressively
> > >> scheduling other tasks in while we're running, so wall time is pretty
> > >> close to right.
> > >
> > > I agree completely.
> >
> > Is this important? This timing is entirely for diagnostic purposes,
> > so why try to make it work on every possible platform. We need to document
> > that -enable-timing may fail, and that's it.
>
> The point is to use get_run_time() from -liberty and never worry about
> portability again.

Let's be realistic. This isn't a command for general users of GDB, it isn't
even a command for general users of frontends to GDB. It's a command for
developers of frontends to GDB which currently means just myself and Vladimir,
and maybe a couple of others like Bob Rossi and Alain Magloire.

I'm not familiar with get_run_time but I'm sure we all know getrusage through
the time shell command. If the frontend appears to be slow I can see if that's
due to MI or other things running on my system. I'm not sure that I can do
that with get_run_time. I would like to start with getrusage and then when
there are hoards of developers rushing to develop frontends for GDB using
MI on Windows, I'll be happy to accommodate them.

--
Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob