Why do we have two ways of finding sniffers?

[Mark Kettenis]

> From: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
> Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 17:16:46 -0700
> 
> I don't understand why we need both alternatives.  Shouldn't it be
> sufficient to simply have each entry in the list point to a function
> that expects the next frame's frame_info and a prologue cache, and
> returns a 'struct frame_unwind *' or zero?

I don't think there is a *technical* reason why we need both
alternatives.  It's more a matter that we had (and still have to some
extent) a pretty long list of basically unmainted targets.  So
converting frame_unwind_append_sniffer() into
frame_unwind_append_unwinder() is difficult to accomplish.  But you
should really answer Andrew about this since he wrote that code.

Mark