This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [discuss] Support for reverse-execution
- From: Michael Snyder <msnyder at redhat dot com>
- To: Paul Schlie <schlie at comcast dot net>
- Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 13:57:42 -0700
- Subject: Re: [discuss] Support for reverse-execution
- References: <BEB37F34.A391firstname.lastname@example.org>
Paul Schlie wrote:
Alternatively to attempting to specify an interface to a lone commercial
I don't think that's what we're doing -- these commands are meant
to be generically useful, as soon as anyone else can support
or presume the intelligence need be "remote" to GDB;
We're not doing that either -- the user interface makes no
assumption about the target interface.
I wonder if it may be more sensible to consider initially defining the basic
generic facilities by which GDB may directly support undoable/reversible
execution, and checkpoint features.
Well, that's an idea that some of us (me, at least...) have
thought about too -- but it's, if not orthogonal, at least
separable from this discussion. If gdb asks the target to
step backwards or continue backwards, we really don't care
how the target accomplishes this (eg. whether by restoring
a saved state, or actually reversing the execution of individual
I've thought all along that the "bookmark" idea is separable
from the "run backwards" idea.