Is this a problematic design for gdb non-stop mode automation?

Question

I've implemented this code in my .gdbinit file to make stop-requiring gdb commands work(such as x, set etc)

define hook-x
  if $pince_debugging_mode == 0
    interrupt
  end
end

define hook-stop
  if $pince_debugging_mode == 0
    c &
  end
end 

The purpose of $pince_debugging_mode variable is to inform gdb if the program is interrupting the target for debugging purposes or not.

I have a concern about signal concurrency with this design: Lets say we put a breakpoint on an address and while waiting it to get triggered we wanted to check some addresses with the x command. After x command gets executed, hook-stop will get executed because we have stopped the thread with the x command. And lets say breakpoint has been reached while hook-post is executing but hook-stop isn't aware of that and the $pince_debugging_mode still equals to 0 so it'll execute the c & command and the target will continue. So the stop at breakpoint won't mean anything because of this concurrency problem.

This problem never occurred yet but I'm afraid of the odds of occurring, even if it's very low, I don't want to take the risk. What can I do to avoid this possible problem?

Note: defining a hookpost-x is problematic because whenever x command throws an exception hookpost won't get executed, so it'll be impossible to continue after a exception-throwing x command