From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23838 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2014 20:03:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact insight-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: insight-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 23829 invoked by uid 89); 7 Jan 2014 20:03:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 20:03:19 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s07K3I8X019256 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 15:03:18 -0500 Received: from valrhona.uglyboxes.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s07K3HwY008668 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 7 Jan 2014 15:03:17 -0500 Message-ID: <52CC5D85.8030400@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 20:03:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Tromey , Insight List Subject: Re: [PATCH] use an observer instead of deprecated_file_changed_hook References: <871u0jhamf.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <871u0jhamf.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-q1/txt/msg00001.txt.bz2 On 01/07/2014 11:09 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: > I think it works ok. I tested it by running the "file" command in the > console and seeing whether insight reacted. I'm not totally sure > whether this is a sufficient check, though. With the additional checks you've added in the observer function, this should work. The standard test (IIRC -- I haven't tried this in years) is to start insight on one executable, debug it a bit (run, step, step, step) with some open data windows, then load an entirely new executable. If that runs and the displays all show the new executable's state, then all is probably good. I believe I also then followed with "file" (no executable), which should simple clear state and "empty" all the windows. From discussions on IRC, this use case is preserved. So that's good enough for me. Thank you for the patch! Keith