Re: MI: performance of getting stack arguments

[Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>]

 > > 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.
 > 
 > These are not _requirements_, these are _use_cases_.  The requirements
 > are the same: to be fast enough for most uses.  E.g., nothing prevents
 > me from including "bt" in the commands list of a breakpoint, which
 > would force GDB to produce the backtrace on each stop.

Whatever you want to call them I think, in practice, such commands will
generally be issued more frequently with a UI than from the command line.
Improving the response time can be tackled at two ends of course: not only
making the command run more quickly but also running it less frequently.  For
example, using event notification to tell the UI when the current frame has
changed.  Currently for Emacs I request a new stack after each user command,
which is clearly inefficient.


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