From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25314 invoked by alias); 8 Sep 2008 04:56:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 25305 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Sep 2008 04:56:05 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 04:55:26 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81CE6981FE; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 04:55:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4647C981E7; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 04:55:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KcYmY-0000z6-MM; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 00:55:22 -0400 Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 04:56:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Snyder Cc: Jason Molenda , "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [remote protocol] step range? Message-ID: <20080908045522.GA3766@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Snyder , Jason Molenda , "gdb@sourceware.org" References: <48C05DAF.3070705@vmware.com> <61DDBF42-6D9B-4E8C-9B0C-CB9BB68F5F11@apple.com> <48C09B98.3010506@vmware.com> <693D921E-42E7-474A-9DCB-82FAA2DE3679@apple.com> <20080906041540.GA10729@caradoc.them.org> <48C32177.6060507@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48C32177.6060507@vmware.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2008-09/txt/msg00042.txt.bz2 On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 05:33:59PM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote: > Well you know, guys, it's always optional for a target > to implement a new protocol command. If there's a target > for which this would be hard, or wouldn't gain you much, > you can always leave it un-implemented. Yes, I'm more concerned about e.g. inlining. Basically, anything in the inferior control loop that would be surprised by more than one step. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery