Pawel Piech wrote:
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> On Tuesday 29 April 2008 22:03:20 Pawel Piech
wrote:
>>
>>> Pedro Alves wrote:
>>>
>>>> I can't see how is it different -- in the
frontend's perspective --
>>>> of keeping track of what to pass to
--thread= *provided GDB doesn't switch
>>>> threads automatically*. But then again,
I'm no frontend writer.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Using -thread-select makes it easier for the
front end to be compatible
>>> with older versions of GDB.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, I though that only reason that -thread-select
is simpler is because
>> in DSF, specifically, there's no central place
where commands are send
>> and where --thread can be conveniently added. I'm
not saying this is good,
>> or bad, but this is not the case for all frontend.
Am I wrong?
>>
>> - Volodya
>>
> In DSF-GDB there _is_ a central place where commands
are sent, this is
> where the protocol state is adjusted using
-thread-select. However, the
> --thread option is being added to many but not all
commands, so the same
> mechanism that adds the -thread-select could not be
reused to add
> --thread option. Instead each command which accepts
--thread that would
> need to be adjusted to use the --thread, but only when
in non-stop
> debugging mode.
This is not actually. The plan is for eery command will
accept --thread.
Those that don't have any use of it will ignore it. The only
command,
at the moment, for which the meaning of --thread is not yet
clear, and for
which the frontend might have to have custom decision logic,
is --exec-continue.
- Volodya
|