From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
To: Jafa <jafa@silicondust.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Frame handling
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 12:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3F018586.8010209@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <00d001c33f8f$8cc48b30$0a00a8c0@nkelseyhome>
>>>> Question - reading through this again I think the goal of call these
>>>> functions is to work with the current frame and the function get passed the
>>>> child frame so they can do a backtrace if it hasn't already been done... why
>>>> not call a function to do a 1 level backtrace and then eliminate the
>>>> next_frame parameter? It would recduce confusion and most ports will have an
>>>> internal unwind function anyway.
>
>
>>
>>> Question - reading through this again I think the goal of call these
>>> functions is to work with the current frame and the function get passed the
>>> child frame so they can do a backtrace if it hasn't already been done... why
>>> not call a function to do a 1 level backtrace and then eliminate the
>>> next_frame parameter? It would recduce confusion and most ports will have an
>>> internal unwind function anyway.
>
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand the question.
> I agree, and I don't think it will make much difference eitehr way, however
> I was just thinking that it would be a whole lot easier to explain these
> functions...
>
Um, this is still dangling. Can you please express your question using
terminology consistent with the frame unwind code.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-01 12:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-01 1:20 Jafa
2003-07-01 3:42 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-01 4:18 ` Andrew Cagney
[not found] ` <redirect-6800274@silicondust.com>
2003-07-01 5:13 ` Jafa
2003-07-01 12:58 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2003-07-01 14:09 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-01 14:57 ` Andrew Cagney
[not found] ` <redirect-6810110@silicondust.com>
2003-07-01 17:00 ` Jafa
2003-07-02 7:13 ` libgdb jacques
[not found] ` <redirect-6810084@silicondust.com>
2003-07-01 16:14 ` Frame handling Jafa
2003-07-01 17:59 ` Andrew Cagney
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-07-01 5:00 Jafa
2003-07-01 12:45 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-07-01 13:02 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-07-03 9:05 ` Paul N. Hilfinger
2003-04-08 18:35 Jafa
2003-04-14 3:43 ` Andrew Cagney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3F018586.8010209@redhat.com \
--to=ac131313@redhat.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=jafa@silicondust.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox