On 02 February 2006 17:42, Brian Dessent wrote: > Dave Korn wrote: > >> I'm having a conceptual difficulty here: Under what circumstances >> would you expect there *not* to be a debugger attached to the inferior >> to which the debugger is attached? That's a bit zen, isn't it? > > The code in question here runs many times in the normal course of any > Cygwin program -- debugger or no. The idea behind guarding the call to > OutputDebugString() with "if (being_debugged())" was that the call to > IsDebuggerPresent() was cheaper than the call to OutputDebugString(), and > that a well-behaived, non-debug build of a binary should not needlessly > send tons and tons of nonsense to OutputDebugString unless it's actually > being debugged and there is something there to interpret the nonsense.
Um, that's two people now who thought I was referring to the cygwin side of the patch. No, this is the bit of your post that I was replying to: "then gdb could simply read that variable in the process' memory before deciding whether to handle the fault. " Is it the case that IsDebuggerPresent doesn't detect when gdb is attached? cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today....