From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28573 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2008 13:27:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 28564 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jun 2008 13:27:39 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Jun 2008 13:27:22 +0000 Received: (qmail 11944 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2008 13:27:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (vladimir@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 5 Jun 2008 13:27:20 -0000 From: Vladimir Prus To: "Marc Khouzam" Subject: Re: non-stop and current thread exiting Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 13:27:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA0429117A@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> In-Reply-To: <6D19CA8D71C89C43A057926FE0D4ADAA0429117A@ecamlmw720.eamcs.ericsson.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200806051727.19098.vladimir@codesourcery.com> 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: 2008-06/txt/msg00028.txt.bz2 On Thursday 05 June 2008 17:18:20 Marc Khouzam wrote: > > > What I was thinking if that if you select a thread, and continue it, > > and the thread exits, it would be more user-friendly to gray this > > thread, add "(exited)" and then retire it next time we stop. > > That is an interesting idea. As all UI ideas, its value will be > determined in actual usage. Of course. > But it may be nice to have this option. Right. > > > You are right that some frontend changes will be required -- but they > > are required anyway to show the "running" state of the thread, so > > seems the extra change to show "exited" state does not add much > > complexity. > > If the output of thread-list-ids is simply augmented with (exited), > you are right that it would be an easy change for a frontend. Actually, I plan that in the output of -thread-info, each thread will have a field 'state', that can be either 'stopped' or 'running' or 'exited'. So, a frontend not wishing to specially display exited threads will ignore threads with state=exited. (Incidentally, we might want to introduce more fine-grained values of state, like 'stepping'). > > > In the case of b) or c) one point that is important for the > > > a frontend is how GDB will react to prohibited commands > > > when no thread is selected? Will a prohibited command > > > cause an ^error or maybe an empty ^done, or something else? > > > > With (b), you always have some thread selected. When it is actually > > exited thread, I'd say ^error is the best way. If you send a command > > and get empty ^done, while you expect some data in the response, it's > > not very good, I think. > > Sounds right. OK. - Volodya