Nic Ferrier wrote:
> >>3. to concentrate on one thread
> >>Sometimes I don't want to jump across code because another thread
> >>comes in, I just want to debug in one thread.
>
> >Let's see if I understand this. You're app has threads A and B and
> >you're stepping through code on thread A, when you execute some
> >code that causes thread A to be suspended and thread B to resume
> >at some other point in the program. You don't want your next step
> >command to take you to that point. Instead, when you issue the step
> >command, you want the debugger to be smart enough to wait until
> >thread A resumes and then move to the next step in thread A. Right?
>
> Again, exactly right.
>
I agree this would be useful, but it would be nice if it was
configurable - sometimes you might want to know if another thread has
possibly affected some state that the current method relies on.
Adam Ambrose
Software Design Engineer
Geoworks
