From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21950 invoked by alias); 1 Jun 2002 22:25:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 21896 invoked from network); 1 Jun 2002 22:25:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.112.240.27) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 2002 22:25:08 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8546A3E5E; Sat, 1 Jun 2002 18:25:17 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3CF949CC.5080108@cygnus.com> Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2002 15:25:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0rc3) Gecko/20020530 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Keith Seitz Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [MI] Synchronous event notification References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00001.txt.bz2 > UIs prefer to respond to events when something happens. In the later case > above, we've asked gdb to install a breakpoint at main, but the UI won't > actually do anything (like update breakpoint markers or breakpoint > windows) UNTILL it gets the event from gdb. > > So, if we need to vote, I vote that we output aync events all the time. > (Of course, this would mean we really need to get target output nailed > for the natives, but that's another battle.) I don't think a vote is needed - it matches the original MI intent. All events were to be considered considered async. Andrew