Re: MI output command error

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 10:03:55AM +1300, Nick Roberts wrote:
> 
> > I'm as mystified as Dave as to how you could read the manual and
> > believe GDB/MI was designed to operate synchronously.  A number of MI
> > commands have documentation that begins with "Asynchronous command." In
> > particular, look at -exec-interrupt, which makes no sense as a
> > synchronous command.
> 
> I think the problem that people like Bob and myself have with this, is that
> when GDB is compiled out of the box, it doesn't operate asynchronously. So
> if we run GDB using MI, -exec-interrupt *doesn't* interrupt the inferior:
> ...
> ^done
> (gdb) 
> 111-exec-continue
> 111^running
> (gdb) 
> 222-exec-interrupt
> 
> Dave Korn's explanation is very helpful. Considering the MI output to be
> asynchronous, makes it much easier to understand. The fact remains, however,
> that for native targets at least (the most common configuration?), operation
> is synchronous. It leads me to wonder how this discrepancy arises.

Lack of implementation.  No one's done the work.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC