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

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

 > > In Emacs, multiple breakpoints are only created when the user specifies
 > > the overloaded function in the GUD buffer (if he clicks on the fringe in
 > > an overloaded function in the source buffer he only gets one breakpoint at
 > > the line on which he clicked).
 > > 
 > > If GDB sets all these breakpoints, unwanted ones could then be deleted
 > > manually either by typing "delete BKPTNO" in the GUD buffer, or clicking
 > > on individual breakpoint icons in the fringe of the source buffers.
 > 
 > I don't think such solution is entirely satisfactory, for the following
 > reason:
 > 
 > 1. UI should not require to type GDB command for such basic task as adding
 > breakpoints.

The GUD buffer is generally additional to the graphical like features: for
those who like to use the command line and for more obscure features which have
no graphical counterpart.  Also, of course, for environments that only support
tarminal based applications.

 > 2. Overloaded functions can be scattered over several source file, so
 > clicking on fringe is highly inconvenient -- the files might not be even
 > open.  

For such cases there is also a breakpoints buffer from which all breakpoints
can be controlled.

 > 3. Assuming we have a list of breakpoints (which Eclipse and KDevelop
 > do), we surely can delete breakpoints there. However, adding unwanted
 > breakpoints right away will not be good in non-stop mode:
 >
 >   - Some threads might already stop on unwanted breakpoints before you
 >   delete them 
 >   - You might run out of hardware resources while setting unwanted
 >    breakpoints

Running GDB in "non-stop mode" sounds highly ambitious and may happen a long
time in the future, if at all.  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.

 > 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.

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