[remote protocol] step range?

Daniel Jacobowitz drow@false.org
Mon Sep 8 04:56:00 GMT 2008


On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 05:33:59PM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote:
> Well you know, guys, it's always optional for a target
> to implement a new protocol command.  If there's a target
> for which this would be hard, or wouldn't gain you much,
> you can always leave it un-implemented.

Yes, I'm more concerned about e.g. inlining.  Basically, anything in
the inferior control loop that would be surprised by more than one
step.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery



More information about the Gdb mailing list