Re: [PATCH 0/2] info breakpoints improvements

[Pedro Alves <pedro@palves.net>]

On 2022-05-24 15:11, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Mai 24 2022, Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches wrote:
> 
>>> Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 14:50:01 +0100
>>> Cc: luis.machado@arm.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>>> From: Pedro Alves <pedro@palves.net>
>>>
>>>>> A location only breaks if it is enabled, _and_ its parent is enabled, so never.
>>>>
>>>> That's what I thought.  But then why not "propagate" the "n" of the
>>>> disabled breakpoint to all of its locations?  
>>>
>>> Because then when you re-enable the parent breakpoint, you'd have lost the enabled/disabled
>>> state of the individual locations.
>>
>> I don't understand why would that be lost.  I'm not proposing to
>> actually disable each location, I propose to _display_ them as
>> disabled in that case.
> 
> I think it would be better in that case to omit the column or display it
> as "-", to indicate that it is ignored right now.
> 

Yes, we could print them differently, preserving the user-specified enable/disable
state.  We print them in uppercase N/Y when the location is disabled due to an invalid
condition already, for example.