From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2958 invoked by alias); 8 May 2006 00:36:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 2950 invoked by uid 22791); 8 May 2006 00:36:09 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from eastrmmtao02.cox.net (HELO eastrmmtao02.cox.net) (68.230.240.37) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 May 2006 00:36:07 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([68.9.66.48]) by eastrmmtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060508003605.QJZP15470.eastrmmtao02.cox.net@localhost.localdomain>; Sun, 7 May 2006 20:36:05 -0400 Received: from bob by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.52) id 1Fctjr-0004a5-K8; Sun, 07 May 2006 20:36:39 -0400 Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 01:26:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: gdb@sourceware.org Cc: Jim Ingham Subject: Re: asynchronous MI output commands Message-ID: <20060508003639.GA17520@brasko.net> References: <17500.8198.679332.240864@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20060506040637.GA14894@nevyn.them.org> <20060506114933.GF25114@brasko.net> <20060506152046.GA24267@nevyn.them.org> <20060506164030.GK25114@brasko.net> <20060506165249.GA25972@nevyn.them.org> <20060506194618.GL25114@brasko.net> <20060506203741.GA29439@nevyn.them.org> <20060507004518.GM25114@brasko.net> <20060507212711.GA18344@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060507212711.GA18344@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2006-05/txt/msg00073.txt.bz2 On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 05:27:11PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 08:45:18PM -0400, Bob Rossi wrote: > > OK, with that information, I see it is impossible to tell just from > > looking at the MI output, to determine if the command is synchronous > > or not. Look below for a solution to this problem for me. > > What? ^done is a synchronous response, *stopped is an asynchronous > response. There's not really any way of knowing whether a command > might produce later asynchronous output. > > [Here we run into the limits of the current, mostly synchronous > implementation.] Daniel, Please also notice that Xcode actually did modify the MI protocol to tell the front end about the asynchronous commands. http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2004-09/msg00238.html Bob Rossi