Conversation
|
I'm not 100% sure about this, I see you've implemented the same semantics that the Stack module has, but unlike stack frames, there's no meaningful order in the thread list (besides thread creation). In particular while it does make sense to only show Yet, the problem of having too many threads is real, off the top of my head I can see two solutions:
Option 1 kind of nullifies the idea of having a Threads module in the first place, since the Stack pretty much shows the same information in this case. Option 2 might be maybe too cumbersome to use... |
|
Hi, you've got a good point. Actually I had in mind a case when there is one (or may be 2) primary thread(s), and multiple worker threads, so I wanted to display threads with 'minimum' numbers. And the first solution was not really well-devised. Now a parameter 'show' is implemented instead, it gets a list of ranges, from which allowed threads are selected. E.g. one can select a set like this: '1,2,5-7,c', where 'c' means current. This solution makes sense if those thread numbers are unique, and it seems gdb ensures this inside one given gdb session: after gdb attaches the numbers are being added after the last thread without going into the gaps of finished threads. However I have little experience in multi-threaded debugging. |
When there are many threads in the debugged program the threads pane takes up too much space. This patch introduces the limit to number of threads displayed and sets it to 8 by default.