Re: [PATCH] Re: bug in mi when setting breakpoint

[Nick Roberts <nickrob@snap.net.nz>]

 > > Running GDB in "non-stop mode" sounds highly ambitious and may happen a
 > > long time in the future, if at all.
 > 
 > I'm not sure if you saw an announcement about non-stop mode project. It's
 > rather near future.

You probably know more than me, it didn't give any timescales.

 > > I'm talking about implementing a simple solution, for now.  Even if
 > > non-stop mode does become a reality, it presumably won't be the default
 > > behaviour, so it won't break existing front ends.
 > 
 > This does not mean that all MI commands should behave differently in
 > non-stop mode.

They wouldn't.  I don't see why we should design MI commands around a feature
that doesn't exist yet and will presumably be optional.

 > >  > I think it's more clear to set only those breakpoints that user want to
 > >  > set, as opposed to setting all of them, and then removing undesired
 > >  > ones.
 > > 
 > > Yes, but I still haven't see how you propose to do this.
 > 
 > -break-insert, in case when there are several overloaded functions, should
 > return this:
 > 
 >    ^error,msg="Several overloaded functions found",
 > 	functions=["int f(int)", "int f(double)"]

In Emacs, multiple breakpoints for overloaded functions would be specified
from the GUD buffer.  How do you specify them graphically?

 > then, break-insert should have an -o parameter that specifies a list of
 > overloaded functions to set breakpoints on:
 > 
 >   -break-insert -o 0 f

It all seems rather elaborate, but I don't feel that strongly about it as I'm
not yet in a position to fully migrate Emacs to GDB/MI.

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