This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Trace state variables
Tom Tromey wrote:
"Stan" == Stan Shebs <stan@codesourcery.com> writes:
Stan> Since internalvar handling has changed recently, I've left off the
Stan> value.c bit to make "print $foo" work.
Will this be forthcoming?
Yep, just have to figure out the new way of things.
Stan> + case BINOP_ASSIGN:
It seems a little odd to add BINOP_ASSIGN but not BINOP_ASSIGN_MODIFY.
<groan> You're going to make me do it, aren't you. :-)
Stan> extern int remote_supports_cond_tracepoints (void);
Stan> + extern char *unpack_varlen_hex (char *buff, ULONGEST *result);
It seems like this could be in a header somewhere.
This is one of the temporary hacks pending target-vectorization of
tracepoint ops.
Stan> + /* The list of all trace state variables. We don't retain pointers to
Stan> + any of these for any reason - API is by name or number only - so it
Stan> + works to have a vector of objects. */
Stan> +
Stan> + VEC(tsv_s) *tvariables;
Stan> +
Stan> + /* The next integer to assign to a variable. */
Stan> +
Stan> + int next_tsv_number = 1;
It seems like these, plus some of the new functions, could be static.
It is hard to say for sure since I don't know what future patches might do.
They could be, yeah, remote.c code will handle tsv's one-by-one, no need
to pass whole list.
Stan> + static void
Stan> + tvariables_info (char *args, int from_tty)
[...]
Stan> + printf_filtered (_("Name\t\t Initial\tCurrent\n"));
I think that brand-new formatted output should be done using the ui_out
machinery. Is there some drawback to doing that? I really don't
know... I would have expected ui_out to be used universally but instead
it seems somewhat random, and I don't know why. (I assume that whoever
was doing this transition ran out of steam... ?)
I can't even remember why I didn't use ui_out. Well, that's why we do
reviews... :-)
Stan