This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Single stepping and threads
> > I would say yes. A step should be a few instructions, while stepping
> > over a call is potentially a much larger number of instructions.
> > As a result, stepping over without letting the other threads go would
> > more likely cause a lock.
> I think you mean "no" then?
Oops, sorry, I meant "no".
One of my coworkers expressed his opinion as follow:
I would find it confusing if "step" and "next" behave differently with
respect to threads, because they seem like basically the same thing.
"Next is just like step, except that it goes over calls" seems simple to
me. "Next is just like step, except that it goes over calls, and has
some subtle difference regarding threads" seems more complicated to me.
So I would suggest leaving the default as "off", or else changing it