This is the mail archive of the gdb@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: target_op(..) -> target_op(target, ...) obvious


As part of the on-going OO of GDB, the "target vector" is one of the next things up for treatment. I'd like to be sure that everyones ok with the mechanical transformatioin:

target_OP (...) -> taget_OP (target, ...)

being considered "fairly obvious" (post patch, give it a few days, commit patch). Pushing the target around is going to involve touching files across maintenance boundraries.

[Not my day.]


The rationale is the same as for the architecture vector along with the push to eliminate global thread/frame state. It is to make it possible to have multiple instances of a specific target. For instance,two ptrace inferior's, or two active remotes.

Andrew



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]