Message-ID: <45D66925.6060008 at rftp.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 18:32:05 -0800
From: Robert Roessler <robertr at rftp.com>
Organization: Robert's High-performance Software
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: LablGTK List <lablgtk at math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>
Subject: Re: GTK and ocamldebug on Windows
References: <eqbh8d$aun$1 at sea.gmane.org> <45CA4FF9.7050601 at rftp.com> <90823c940702161635n73bc38fcv69f0cff8a2ff1114 at mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <90823c940702161635n73bc38fcv69f0cff8a2ff1114 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Length: 907

Dmitry Bely wrote:
> On 2/8/07, Robert Roessler <robertr at rftp.com> wrote:
> 
>> OTOH, I have always been a bit mystified as to *why* the OCaml
>> BYTECODE debugger is tied to *nix platforms...
> 
> See e.g. this five-years-old thread:
> 
> http://caml.inria.fr/pub/ml-archives/caml-list/2002/10/34765f0578c1d241f62ad2e72e7eeda3.fr.html 

Thanks - now I see it isn't *just* because of the available "sockets" 
API not being identical, since that could be handled easily enough.

It's the whole "replay" thing, which is something I am not used to 
considering when I hear the word "debugger", that would cause more 
trouble. ;)

Without having something that does essentially what vfork does (which 
I assume is what Linux fork is, at least in terms of the copy-on-write 
  version of the process data), it just seems like you would have perf 
problems.

Robert Roessler
robertr@rftp.com
http://www.rftp.com