From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22607 invoked by alias); 17 Nov 2006 15:35:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 22595 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Nov 2006 15:35:14 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net (HELO elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (209.86.89.65) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Nov 2006 15:35:09 +0000 Received: from [68.166.114.35] (helo=[IPv6:::1]) by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Gl5k0-0001aJ-4x; Fri, 17 Nov 2006 10:34:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20061117151519.GA31319@nevyn.them.org> References: <200611161547.46997.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <37D0E16F-2E33-47F4-9121-FC9125174F20@computer.org> <20061117151519.GA31319@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Cc: Vladimir Prus , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Greg Watson Subject: Re: MI: frozen variable objects Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 15:35:00 -0000 To: Daniel Jacobowitz X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-ELNK-Trace: b18dadd04c208faa1aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec79db039f91ec23521eda3b756bc12f4c22350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-11/txt/msg00174.txt.bz2 On Nov 17, 2006, at 8:15 AM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 08:09:12AM -0700, Greg Watson wrote: >> I agree that gdb should be where the actual check for value change is >> done. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I still don't understand >> the reason for requiring frozen values to be implemented in gdb. Is >> it just to allow your GUI to issue a single '-var-update *' each time >> the debugger suspends? In other words, you're implementing additional >> functionality in gdb to support this operation for the GUI. > > That's one reason. The other is that -var-list-children --all-values > shouldn't read it either. Yes, a GUI could avoid that operation too; > but offering them when they're dangerous to use seems very unwise. > > Isn't all of varobj an additional functionality to support GUI > operations? Yes, definitely. But the operative word is 'support', not 'provide'. However, you are in the best place to know what your GUI needs gdb to do. I just wanted to better understand that, not hinder what you're proposing. Cheers, Greg