Re: GDB record patch 0.1.3.1 for GDB-6.8 release

[Tea <teawater@gmail.com>]

Hi Michael,

How do you think about "query". I always forget the name of variable
that can set by user. So I more like query than it. :)

Thanks,
teawater

On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 2:15 AM, Michael Snyder <msnyder@specifix.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 00:17 +0800, Tea wrote:
>> I think the good way is let user choice. When the user goes back a few
>> insns and he want to change the values of memory or register. The GDB
>> willtalk clear what will happen such as the future record will
>> destory, and ask user if he want to continue or not.
>> Then user can choice with himself.
>>
>> How do you think?
>
> I tend to agree about the user choice.
> Perhaps we could have it as a user-settable mode.
>
> Default might be "the past is read-only", ie. you
> can't change the state.  But you could set a mode
> in which you can change the past (at the cost of
> destroying the future) -- and if you try to do it
> when the past is read-only, gdb could ask you if
> you want to change the mode.
>
> Is that clear?  Or am I being too metaphorical?
>
> Michael
>
>
>