From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16093 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2002 20:16:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 16083 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2002 20:16:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Aug 2002 20:16:43 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7TK1Tl13425 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 16:01:29 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7TKGfu12616; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 16:16:41 -0400 Received: from romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (remus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.252]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7TKGde24379; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 13:16:40 -0700 Received: (from kev@localhost) by romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g7TKGZF24275; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 13:16:35 -0700 Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 13:20:00 -0000 From: Kevin Buettner Message-Id: <1020829201635.ZM24274@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: Joel Brobecker "[RFA/controversial] move bp by line number past the prologue" (Aug 29, 11:15am) References: <20020829181524.GC971@gnat.com> To: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/controversial] move bp by line number past the prologue MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00994.txt.bz2 On Aug 29, 11:15am, Joel Brobecker wrote: > 2002-08-29 Jim Ingham > > * linespec.c (decode_line_1): Skip the function prologue if > funfirstline is set. Changes the behavior of the break command > to skip the function prologue when breaking by line number. Joel, My opinion is that this is a reasonable change providing that we still have a mechanism for setting a breakpoint on the prologue. When I want to do this I usually do ``b *foo'' instead of relying on line numbers. (Usually I don't know the line number anyway.) So, I have no objection to this patch so long as it doesn't change the present behavior of ``b *foo''. I've reread the thread in which this matter was discussed earlier (i.e, the "[RFC] breakpoints and function prologues" messages). Given that there was such disagreement before, I doubt that everyone will agree with my point of view. If this turns out to be the case, might I suggest a user settable option for controlling whether setting a breakpoint by line number will always cause the prologue to be skipped? That way both sides get the behavior they want. (GUIs can set the desired behavior at initialization time.) Kevin