From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11777 invoked by alias); 4 Jan 2003 00:37:25 -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 11770 invoked from network); 4 Jan 2003 00:37:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 4 Jan 2003 00:37:24 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h040bAd22467; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 18:37:10 -0600 Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 00:37:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200301040037.h040bAd22467@duracef.shout.net> To: ezannoni@redhat.com, msnyder@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/PATCH] breakpoint.c: fix until command Cc: drow@mvista.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00130.txt.bz2 Michael Snyder formulates: > 1) Use find_pc_partial_function to determine bounds and > distinguish between in-bounds and out-of-bounds locations. > 2) For func_start > loc >= func_end, use a frame-relative bp. > 3) For func_start == loc or loc < func_start or loc > func_end, > use a frameless bp. > 4) document, document, document! > Including the recursive corner case. In this formulation, my proposal would have: '3) error'. It's actually a pretty cool formulation because it makes the diff between elena's idea and my idea a small diff. I think that my proposal has gotten a sufficient hearing. So go ahead. Michael C loyal opposition