Re: [patch:MI] Observer for thread-changed

[Nick Roberts <nickrob at snap dot net dot nz>]

 > > I agree.  I don't think that we should second guess what front ends will
 > > do.
 > 
 > We should, or frontends will second guess what MI tells them.

If the behaviour of MI is fully documented the frontend won't need to do
guessing of any kind.

 >                                                                "Current
 > thread" is not a exact thing, and "current thread changed" is not an exact
 > thing either, so we should provide specific meaning that is most useful to
 > frontends, and opposed to providing a meaning that is most easy for gdb.

I know that Pedro has a patch that might change things but what different
meanings does "Current thread" have now.  It seems pretty unambiguous to me:
it's the value stored inferior_ptid and the thread that has a "*" next to it
in the output of "info threads".

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob