> > I'm also leaning towards this: -exec-continue only
continuing
> > the current thread, a la java.
> > Although, also having a 'continue all' may prove
useful.
>
> Again -- exec-continue resuming just one thread will be
a change in behaviour.
> We can take two approaches:
>
> 1. The MI interface we've discussed for non-stop is
essentially MI3 (and will
> be used both in all-stop and non-stop mode). We're in
position to change anything
> we like, and are not bound by backward compatibility,
or anything.
>
> 2. The MI interface for non-stop is MI2 + minimal set
of changes. I think that
> Pawel's opposition to the --thread idea indicates that
he prefers this approach.
> Then, we rather not change the behaviour of existing
commands.
>
> There are not many high-level warts in
MI2/non-stop/async, so I'm willing
> to go with (2).
Yeah, I see that the less impactful is (2). Ok with me.
|
