From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7554 invoked by alias); 12 Apr 2006 11:38:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 7545 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Apr 2006 11:38:13 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su (HELO zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su) (158.250.17.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 11:38:10 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su with spam-scanned (Exim 4.50) id 1FTdfb-0006Kn-CB for gdb@sources.redhat.com; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:38:04 +0400 Received: from zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su ([158.250.17.23]) by zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1FTdfI-0006H5-R7; Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:37:41 +0400 From: Vladimir Prus To: Jim Ingham Subject: Re: MI: type prefixes for values Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:38:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 Cc: GDB List References: <200602171724.03824.ghost@cs.msu.su> <200604070954.14083.ghost@cs.msu.su> <3657EE52-4544-435A-A842-06EC44FFDA41@apple.com> In-Reply-To: <3657EE52-4544-435A-A842-06EC44FFDA41@apple.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200604121537.40398.ghost@cs.msu.su> 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/msg00142.txt.bz2 On Friday 07 April 2006 21:37, Jim Ingham wrote: > Yes, it looks like we added that. Our -stack-list-frames looks like: > > 553^done,stack=[frame= > {level="0",addr="0x00003db0",fp="0xbffff2c0",func="main",file="/ > private/nfsroot/Users/jingham/Projects/ManyThreads/main.m",fullname="/ > private/nfsroot/Users/jingham/Projects/ManyThreads/ > main.m",line="64",dir="/private/nfsroot/Users/jingham/Projects/ > ManyThreads/"}] Hi Jim, I've now got one last questions. Why do you do this managements of variable objects in XCode, and not on gdb side, using -var-update? If I understand correctly, each time program stops, we need to know for each variable object if: - it's still alive (containing frame has not exited) - changed the value - is in different frame from the current (when we enter the function) - if the expression variable object was created with refers to different variables now (say, if you created varobj for global 'i', now just entered a block containing local 'i'). In mainline, -var-update handles the first two points already. It's possible to support third point easily. I'm not sure about the fourth. So, why did you decide to handle varobj lifetime in XCode, and not in gdb? Thanks, Volodya