Re: Display feature request: gud-overlay-arrow

[Nick Roberts]

 > There is no reason to define the new bitmap as "built-in".
 >
 > Just use define-fringe-bitmap to define the new bitmap in your
 > own Lisp code.

Yes, of course.  That's much simpler.

 > As an alternative to the hollow triangle, you could use a filled
 > triangle (identical to the current bitmap), but give it is less
 > prominent color, e.g. medium gray.
 > 
 > You could call the bitmap something like "gud-inactive-arrow", and
 > put a face named "gud-inactive-arrow" (inherit from "fringe") on
 > it -- then people could customize it to their own liking.

I don't really know how to put a face on a bitmap but I don't mind if
someone more familiar with faces wants to play around with it.

I'm more concerned that it doesn't update properly (perhaps thats what you
alluded to with "post-switch-buffer-hook", but I don't think so):

 If you have a program that calls a procedure and you set a breakpoint on that
 procedure and then enter "run", the source buffer should display correctly
 with the solid arrow.

 If you now do "up", the main routine displays, again with a solid arrow, but
 this time it should be hollow.  Dragging the mode line corrects this.

 If you now do "down", the called procedure displays, but with a hollow arrow.
 Again dragging the mode line corrects this.

It seems to me that the buffer is not being re-displayed even though I have
deleted (set to nil) and re-computed the marker gud-overlay-arrow-position.  I
think this is a display bug, and that Emacs should realise that the appearance
of this buffer has changed.  Although this might be hard to do, in practice.

I've committed my changes to gdb-ui.el so you can see what I mean.  If the
re-display in Emacs can't be changed, I will back my changes out.

 > >                                      It includes some minor corrections
 > > to the doco.
 > 
 > Please install that part of the patch.

Done.


-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob