Re: [PATCH:MI] Use observers for breakpoints

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

 > I would still prefer it if you passed the breakpoint rather than
 > the breakpoint number. I'd rather not have to change the interface
 > later if the breakpoint ended up being needed.

Sure, it's quite easy to do.

 > > breakpoint_create_event
 > > breakpoint_modify_event
 > > breakpoint_delete_event
 > > 
 > > I don't know if there's much to be gained in differentiating between
 > > creating and modifying a breakpoint but it would certainly make sense
 > > to have two observers, breakpoints_changed and breakpoints_deleted, say.
 > 
 > We can indeed start with 2 for now.

OK, I'll do that.

I'll submit another patch but it won't be anytime in the near future because I
have to look more carefully at the output of each type of breakpoint command.

As it breaks existing behaviour, the MI level would need to be bumped.  It
would make sense to do this at the same time as other similar pending changes,
e.g., no-stop mode, argument parsing etc

Perhaps we could aim for a release in which to do this, e.g. 7.0, in about
a year's time?

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