From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25476 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2008 04:26:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 25465 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Apr 2008 04:26:55 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout3.012.net.il (HELO mtaout3.012.net.il) (84.95.2.7) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 03:06:28 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.228.217]) by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0JZY00008RYFVI84@i_mtaout3.012.net.il> for gdb@sourceware.org; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 06:20:39 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 07:51:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: MI floating varobj of invalid value In-reply-to: <200804270127.48885.vladimir@codesourcery.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: References: <200804270127.48885.vladimir@codesourcery.com> 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: 2008-04/txt/msg00222.txt.bz2 > From: Vladimir Prus > Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 01:27:48 +0400 > > However, if frontend tries to create varobj for foo > at the first stop, and 'foo' is not in scope, then varobj will not be created. Why is that? Since a floating varobj's expression is re-parsed every time, you should be able to delay parsing and not fail creation because some of its terms are not in scope, right? > Does making creation of floating varobj always succeed seem a good idea? Yes, I think so. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16471 invoked by alias); 27 Apr 2008 05:12:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 16463 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Apr 2008 05:12:16 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout3.012.net.il (HELO mtaout3.012.net.il) (84.95.2.7) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 05:11:57 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.228.217]) by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0JZY00008RYFVI84@i_mtaout3.012.net.il> for gdb@sourceware.org; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 06:20:39 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 15:38:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: MI floating varobj of invalid value In-reply-to: <200804270127.48885.vladimir@codesourcery.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-ID: References: <200804270127.48885.vladimir@codesourcery.com> 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: 2008-04/txt/msg00225.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20080427153800.jdVQpgjixayTBhD9usFAd_AfqiRdld1XB5gMP8CLfqo@z> > From: Vladimir Prus > Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 01:27:48 +0400 > > However, if frontend tries to create varobj for foo > at the first stop, and 'foo' is not in scope, then varobj will not be created. Why is that? Since a floating varobj's expression is re-parsed every time, you should be able to delay parsing and not fail creation because some of its terms are not in scope, right? > Does making creation of floating varobj always succeed seem a good idea? Yes, I think so.