minutes ui meeting 20070321

minutes ui meeting 20070321

[Elena Zannoni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1 bytes --]



[-- Attachment #2: frysk-20070321 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1610 bytes --]

Attendees:
Elena, Mark, Tim, Stan, Nurdin, Mike, cagney, Rick, Phil, Sami


fhpd demo (driven by script): commands shown were: list, help
(improved, as now you can get help on a specific command), up and
down, print, where, quit, assign. 
Run on non-optimized version of program: works ok on C example program.
Run on optimized version of program: doesn't find variables correctly
quite yet.

Caches dwarf info as it is retrieved/used.

Tab completion for help was added. It now adds a space after the
command name that was completed, so user can type options.  Also does
completion on things from the symbol table.

"print in<TAB>" caused exception.

"break 185"
"break"
caused another exception

break @file@lineno

assign int_21 0
caused a null pointer exception

break @/tmp/hpd.c@185
caused a null pointer exception
in this case breakpoint specified before specifying the program to run
fhdp on.

syntax was changed: cagney asks for justification from Tim: syntax
specify a # but parser interprets that as a comment, so it was changed
to @. Will be rectified once parser is fixed.

"break func_2, go, where" sequence works

Info printed when program stops at a breakpoint is being reworked to
be more legible.

where does the program stop if you say "run <program>". Not clear,
behavior seems to vary. 

list command on assembly program: arrayindexoutofbounds exception
generated


Observers: Andrew and Sami discussed (private discussion) that the
observers/process picker workflows need to be simplified. Was the
design reviewed on the list? Not yet. Please post the ideas for
everybody to understand.

Re: minutes ui meeting 20070321

[Sami Wagiaalla]

> Observers: Andrew and Sami discussed (private discussion) that the
> observers/process picker workflows need to be simplified.
Also discussed here:

   http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4163
> Was the design reviewed on the list? Not yet. Please post the ideas for
> everybody to understand.
>   
The suggestion is:

Gobalizing Observers over the entire session. This means having a global 
list of observers which watch all procs/threads in the current session, 
and allowing the user to choose which ones are on/off. Changes would 
then be a customization of the observers. This means eliminating the 
metaphor that observers are added to procs/threads of course. It also 
has some performance implications.

 From the meeting:
- By selecting which processes belong in a session the user has already 
declared which processes should be observed.
- The user still has the option of filtering away unwanted observations, 
by adding a filter which specifies which executable (process?) he/she is 
interested in.

The bug has been marked as waiting for feed back. Feel free to comment, 
object, or add to it :)

Cheers,
  Sami Wagiaalla