This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Add temporary frames to frame cache.
- From: "Andrew Burgess" <aburgess at broadcom dot com>
- To: "Pedro Alves" <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "gdb-patches at sourceware dot org" <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 11:09:44 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add temporary frames to frame cache.
- References: <51B1EFF2 dot 8070509 at broadcom dot com> <51B2320E dot 2090005 at redhat dot com>
On 07/06/2013 8:18 PM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>
> (BTW, I find the fact that "frame NUMBER" can create a new frame to
> be really a bad interface, and very confusing for users.
I agree, I only spotted this issue as I miss-typed the frame number I
really wanted to change to and was surprised I didn't get an error..
> I'd
> much rather the command would error out if the frame is not found
> (as most frequently that'll be a user mistake), and the user that
> really knows what she's doing and wants to inspect stack at
> some address, would instead do something like
> "frame -create ADDRESS" to create a new frame at a random address.
> The implementation of that would indeed then install this new
> frame as current_frame, and so "bt" from there would start
> unwinding from ADDRESS. The documentation could then also
> document how to get out of this frame in order to start unwinding
> from the current registers again. E.g., pointing at "flushregs".)
I think that would be much better, and I'm happy to put together a patch
to do this unless someone disagrees.
Thanks,
Andrew