Re: [RFC/MI] Event Records vs Commands

[Keith Seitz <keiths at redhat dot com>]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> Breakpoint events can occure ``asynchronously'':  a shared library load
> might trigger the setting of a breakpoint;  a user's breakpoint commands
> might change the state of a breakpoint and then continue.
>
> Hence, as far as I can tell you just want to ``notify-async-output''.

Ok.

> > (gdb)
> > -break-insert main
> > =breakpoint-create,number="1"
> > (gdb)
>
> I believe this is wrong.  There should still be a ``^done''.

Yes, that was just an omission on my part. The manual still contains the
"^done" bits.

> Given breakpoint output appears everywhere in the testsuite, the import
> is going to be a little large.  There should still be a few things that
> can be cherry picked though - some of the testsuite shuffle for instance.

Yes. I do not plan to dump one mega-patch onto people. I will submit
patches piece by piece as best I can, and there will always be the sandbox
branch that I'm working on in case people want to play with the whole
thing.

> If breakpoint-create included complete breakpoint information an
> additional roundtrip could be avoided.  Is this significant?  I suspect
> this is a question for some of the apple hackers as they would have a
> better feel for how critical this one is :-)

I don't really think a breakpoint query is going to do too much, but if
we want to keep it, we certainly can. All I would need to do is make the
code more event friendly.

Keith