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

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

 > We expect that basic non-stop mode will be available in about three months
 > from now.

OK, thanks.

 > > 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.
 > 
 > As I've mentioned, in non-stop mode, adding all breakpoint and then removing
 > undesired ones won't work. So, we need MI support for adding only needed
 > breakpoints. And once we implement such support, and use it in non-stop
 > mode, it won't make much sense to use some different mechanism in all-stop
 > mode -- that will only complicate logic without much benefit.

If your timescale is realistic and your proposal practical then I agree.

 > > In Emacs, multiple breakpoints for overloaded functions would be specified
 > > from the GUD buffer.  How do you specify them graphically?
 > 
 > You present a list of overloaded function, with checkboxes next to each
 > name, that user would check and uncheck as he see fit.

You previously said:

   1. UI should not require to type GDB command for such basic task as adding
   breakpoints.

My point was that in the GUD buffer you can specify an overloaded function,
A::f, by typing

(gdb) break A::f

and get breakpoints in A::f(double), A::f(int), say, but if you click on a line
inside an overloaded function, generally you will only get one breakpoint.

 > > 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.
 > 
 > BTW, insert-all-and-remove-undesired would be as complex. First, you need to
 > detect that several breakpoints were inserted (-break-insert will return
 > several breakpoint ids in that case). Then, you better tell the user about
 > this fact, as he might not be looking at gdb console. And ideally, you'll
 > actually pop up a list of just inserted breakpoints and let the user delete
 > those he does not want -- which is just as complex for frontend as the
 > scheme I've suggested.

I can only see such breakpoints being set from the GUD buffer and the
current warning gets printed there.  He can look at the breakpoints buffer if
he wishes to know more.

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