Re: Proposed mod for stack-select-frame MI command

[Mo DeJong <supermo@bayarea.net>]

On Thu, 01 Aug 2002 19:25:30 -0400
Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com> wrote:

> Mo, is this needed or is it just a convenience?  Won't the client need 
> to track the current stack level and hence can simply adjust/use that 
> local copy.

I am not sure what the possible complications of that approach might
be. You could assume that the stack level was reset to 0 when a
breakpoint was hit and then increment and decrement it. I am
not sure what would happen if you started calling inferior functions
though. I have seen gdb do things like switch back to the innermost
frame after calling an inferior function at some other level of the
stack. If that happened, the client would think the stack was one
value while gdb could think it was another. I would rather just
keep all that info in gdb.

You would also need to assume that the client would not use the
frame, up, down and other cli methods via the MI. If they did, the
local stack level integer that the client held would be wrong.

This just seems like something that should be easy to do via the
MI. It is just a way to access up or down like functionality.
If you check the existing docs for the -stack-select-frame, it
states that up, down, up-silent, and down-silent commands
map the -stack-select-frame. My take on the change is that it
gets the implementation in line with the documentation.
So to sum up, I think it is needed.

cheers
Mo