Re: Reporting non-stop support

[Pawel Piech <pawel dot piech at windriver dot com>]

I don't think a "non-stop" mode needs to be enabled by a "check box".  
It's more of a property of a target rather than a feature that a user 
requests.  Depending on what kind of target the user is connecting to, 
he will likely know beforehand whether it supports non-stop debugging, 
and if it does, he will naturally want it enabled.

Cheers,
Pawel

Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Pawel Piech wrote:
>
>   
> > I just think this shows how important it is that the client be able to
> > use the same protocol to communicate in either mode, and be able to use
> > the event data alone to determine what state actually changed on the target.
> >     
>
> Heh, I don't think so. Do you really think it's acceptable to have a "non-stop"
> checkbox in UI that will not actually work, and find out that it does not work
> only when your program stops for the first time -- stopping all threads? I think
> this is not acceptable in any way -- regardless of how carefully and politely
> gdb phrases "all threads stopped, your real time application is messed up" 
> information.
>
> - Volodya
>
>
>