This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: MI & pretty-printing
- From: Vladimir Prus <vladimir at codesourcery dot com>
- To: tromey at redhat dot com
- Cc: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:18:54 +0400
- Subject: Re: MI & pretty-printing
- References: <200907132142.18043.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <h7tasq$j74$1@ger.gmane.org> <m33a6vpx1s.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
On Thursday 10 September 2009 Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Volodya" == Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com> writes:
>
> Volodya> 1. Do you think it would be OK to make the has_more field
> Volodya> always present? This will allow to simplify the frontend code
> Volodya> a bit?
>
> I actually did this already just to simplify the code :)
>
> Volodya> For non-dynamic varobjs, it should be non-zero in var-create
> Volodya> response if there are children.
>
> For non-dynamic ones, numchild is correct and has_more=0 always.
> This made the most sense to me. But, we can change it if you want.
I though about this, and I think the current behaviour is fine.
Sorry for incoherent comments.
> Volodya> 2. Do you think it would be OK to add a special field to
> Volodya> indicate that varobj is dynamic? For example, if I expand a
> Volodya> regular varobj, I probably want to fetch every field, while for
> Volodya> dynamic, I want to fetch just 10.
>
> It would be fine by me. Just let me know what you want it to be called
> and I will implement it tomorrow.
I guess I need to play more with this to figure if I need it now.
Can we please have this in CVS HEAD, so that I can have other kdevelop users
bang at it?
Thanks,
Volodya
who can play?