From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32053 invoked by alias); 18 Apr 2006 21:37:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 32045 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Apr 2006 21:37:23 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 21:37:21 +0000 Received: from farnswood.snap.net.nz (p202-124-114-111.snap.net.nz [202.124.114.111]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BE87753C80; Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:37:18 +1200 (NZST) Received: by farnswood.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 500) id E643B62A99; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 22:37:13 +0100 (BST) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17477.23561.267057.180@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 06:11:00 -0000 To: Jim Ingham Cc: Robert Dewar , Vladimir Prus , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: MI: performance of getting stack arguments In-Reply-To: References: <1CE7391B-7261-49BD-9068-89C201F555DE@apple.com> <444539D9.80805@adacore.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 22.0.50.37 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-04/txt/msg00255.txt.bz2 > > The ordinary bt from gdb gives this info, and it would be a pain > > not to have it! > > > > I dunno. I find that having a really simple clean stack listing with > just function names makes it much easier to tell where I am in the > program. I agree. The requirements are different: with CLI the user will generally type bt at a specific point in the session, while with MI the command "-stack-list-frames" gets sent every time the UI needs to update. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob