Thank you all for the information.
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Greg Clayton wrote:
>
> > On Mar 29, 2016, at 2:57 AM, Ravitheja Addepally via lldb-dev <
> lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> > I wanted to know if the remote protocol of LLDB is state less or
> not ? When i
> On Mar 29, 2016, at 2:57 AM, Ravitheja Addepally via lldb-dev
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
> I wanted to know if the remote protocol of LLDB is state less or not ?
> When i say state I am referring to if LLDB remembers the current process or
> thread being debugged (which would mean we dont ne
The GDB RSP, which LLDB RSP is derived from is certainly state-full and
maintains an notion of the current thread for queries (reading
registers, etc..) and for execution commands (stepping), see the 'H' packet.
The RSP has evolved quite a bit however and extended packets were
introduced that do
Hello,
I wanted to know if the remote protocol of LLDB is state less or not
? When i say state I am referring to if LLDB remembers the current process
or thread being debugged (which would mean we dont need to specify that in
the client to server packets ) . I was looking at the
GDBRemoteComm
