non-blocking reads/writes and event loops

[Andrew Cagney]

Jim Ingham wrote:


> > As far as I can tell, this provides all the benefits of fully
> > event-loopizing GDB without the cost of making GDB hugely more complex.
> 
> I don't think that the END RESULT of event loop-izing gdb would be to make
> GDB hugely more complex.  In many cases, I think that it would make the
> architecture much simpler and cleaner, since you would not have modal loops
> hiding out all over gdb, but rather a very simple event loop, and,
> hopefully, a standard mechanism for waiting in the event loop that all the
> different modules of gdb could share.  Not to say that the PROCESS of
> getting GDB to this point would be easy, as Andrew points out...

Yes, FWIW, an example of code that would benefit from being inverted is
remote.c.  remote.c, which is implementing a protocol, should be
implemented using a state machine.

	Andrew