Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] Renaming "DSF Disassembly"

I had volunteered to jettison the old view, but I'll be more than happy to yield that fun work to you, Ken :-)


At 03:44 PM 3/10/2010, ken.ryall@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

I think we are now at the point where the old disassembly view can be removed and the DSF version can be renamed.

Let me know if you think I have overlooked something. I would like to do this in time for M6.

Thanks - Ken

From: "Ryall Ken (Nokia-D/Austin)" <ken.ryall@xxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 23:34:25 +0100
To: "cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Renaming "DSF Disassembly"

From: ext Pawel Piech <pawel.piech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >
Reply-To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 05:07:57 +0100
To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Renaming "DSF Disassembly"

As far as this specific case, I think the toggle target factory needs to be contributed in common to avoid the target ID issue as you pointed out.  However, we could use some other mechanism to indicate that a give debugger implementation is using C Breakpoints (see ToggleCBreakpointsTargetFactory.getDefaultToggleTarget() for an example).  Then for debuggers that don't use C Breakpoints their factor could be disabled or at least they would not be the default (as in the editor).

I created bug for moving the target factory to dsf. I attached an initial patch but need some help with how getDefaultToggleTarget() should work. Details are in the bug.

Thanks - Ken

cdt-dev mailing list

Back to the top