MI questions from eclipse.org
Andrew Cagney
ac131313@redhat.com
Fri Sep 27 11:17:00 GMT 2002
> * Variable notification
>> - assignment: Doing a -var-assign follow by a
>> -var-update does not show any variables been change.
>> Is this the behaviour?
>
>
> Yes. (Didn't I get back to you on this already? I thought I had.) Any, the
> way varobj works, it saves a copy of GDB's internal representation for a
> variable. When one updates the root (-var-update), it computes a new
> "value" and compares against the old one.
>
> When you assign a new value to a variable (and it succeeds), this new
> "value" is saved and used for subsequent comparisons (of whether anything
> has changed). This contrasts to how registers work, but the register stuff
> is wrong, IMO. :-) (This happens because MI doesn't modify its "value" for
> the register like varobj does.)
>
>
>> - And on a more complex note, doing -data-write-memory
>> to some memory and the memory was a variable object
>> should -var-update notice this?
>
>
> Yes. In HEAD sources it certainly does. [Aside: In mi2, this will trigger
> an event telling you that something has changed. Unfortunately, we cannot
> tell you WHAT changed. Only that the state of the target has changed. This
> is necessary because there are some really goofy systems out there, like
> those with memory-mapped registers.]
Yes.
The upper bound on the performance is the same as single step.
Andrew
More information about the Gdb
mailing list