Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

"readOnlyTarget" capability #220

Open
roblourens opened this issue Jan 16, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

"readOnlyTarget" capability #220

roblourens opened this issue Jan 16, 2018 · 1 comment
Labels
feature-request Request for new features or functionality

Comments

@roblourens
Copy link
Member

Nuclide has a "readOnlyTarget" capability flag which disables some unsupported features of the debugger, for debugging static dumps. This should exist in the debug protocol too.

Instead of a master flag like "readOnlyTarget", we would prefer more specific flags for individual features. But capabilities usually enable features, not disable them, and it seems weird to have a flag like supportsStepping which must be set 99% of the time.

@mostafaeweda
@ebluestein

Which features are disabled by this flag? Do you think there would be different features supported in different situations (so they'd need to be disabled on a more granular level)?

VS docs: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/d5zhxt22.aspx

@ebluestein
Copy link

This flag disables things like next/stepIn/stepOut/continue, as well as set variable. I don't think we currently disable evaluate, but that might depend on the back-end if it can evaluate in a static dump.

My primary use case for this is debugging a core dump with GDB / LLDB - but other debuggers could use this as well. For example, it's possible to attach in read only mode to a desktop Java app that wasn't started with a debug agent listening (in that mode Java lets you break in and see threads and call frames, but not modify anything or resume - it's basically for debugging deadlocks)

Maybe LaunchResponse / AttachResponse could have an optional isReadOnly boolean in its body? I agree capabilities feels like a strange place for this

@weinand weinand self-assigned this Jan 30, 2018
jonahgraham referenced this issue in jonahgraham/vscode-debugadapter-node Oct 26, 2020
@weinand weinand transferred this issue from microsoft/vscode-debugadapter-node Oct 19, 2021
@weinand weinand added the feature-request Request for new features or functionality label Oct 19, 2021
@weinand weinand removed their assignment Nov 2, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature-request Request for new features or functionality
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants