From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5103 invoked by alias); 24 Mar 2008 23:14:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 5093 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Mar 2008 23:14:34 -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; Mon, 24 Mar 2008 23:14:09 +0000 Received: from kahikatea.snap.net.nz (228.31.255.123.static.snap.net.nz [123.255.31.228]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3F0E3DA2C1; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:14:01 +1300 (NZDT) Received: by kahikatea.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F0CBB8FC6D; Tue, 25 Mar 2008 11:13:53 +1200 (NZST) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18408.13743.341333.779587@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 02:14:00 -0000 To: Pawel Piech Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: MI non-stop mode spec In-Reply-To: <47E7CA7B.2080309@windriver.com> References: <200803190016.02072.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <47E3FA92.40409@windriver.com> <18405.59380.664535.643670@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <47E7CA7B.2080309@windriver.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 22.1.92.2 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-03/txt/msg00212.txt.bz2 > Hi Nick, > Thank you for the reply. I'm still rather curious what you, Vladimir, > and anyone else think of the rest of my suggestions. Hi Pawel, I try to only have an opinion on matters that I have influence over which primarily means use of Gdb in Emacs. Currently Emacs still uses annotations and only a subset of MI for things like variable objects for watch expressions, display of locals etc. This means that I don't have to worry so much about backward compatibility. > One note about the =breakpoints-changed proposed above. I think it > would be a mistake to just replace the ^done reply to > -break-insert/-break-remove with an event alone, because a client would > have no way of knowing whether an event was in response to that client's > request or another client's request. I.e. a client would not be able to > positively determine the ID of the breakpoint he just created. I see > two equally good ways to address this: > 1) Add the =breakpoints-changed event in addition to the ^done with > breakpoint info, but the =breakpoints-changed would have to be sent > AFTER the ^done reply. > 2) Allow clients to specify their own arbitrary ID for a breakpoint, > with an option such as -client-id="abc". Then have the > =breakpoints-changed event and other query commands echo the client-id > along with the regular breakpoint ID. Sure. Events prefixed with "=" are NOTIFY-ASYNC-OUTPUT records as described in the Gdb manual and are issued independently of RESULT-RECORDs like ^done. For CLI commands maybe something like 2) would be needed. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob