Re: [PATCH 1/2] new memory-changed MI notification.

[Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>]

>>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi <yao@codesourcery.com> writes:

Yao> There are usually two views in MI front-end, 'memory view' and 'code
Yao> view', which displays the contents of 'data' and 'code'.

Thanks.

Yao> Memory can be modified in two ways through MI, 'var-assign' and
Yao> 'data-write-memory[-btes]', so we add two flags for suppression
Yao> 'var_assign' and 'data_write_memory'.

Is there a particular reason to have two flags?
It seems one would do.

Usually I think it would be preferable to have a flag correspond to a
notification and not a command; but this would not work so well if a
command needed to suppress two different messages.  (Though if that
happens then maybe we should have a slightly different approach based on
bitmasks.)

Yao> +invalidate_bp_value_on_memory_change (struct inferior *inferior, CORE_ADDR addr,

This line is too long now.

Tom