From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26676 invoked by alias); 31 Mar 2003 23:29:32 -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 26665 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2003 23:29:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (209.53.16.215) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 31 Mar 2003 23:29:29 -0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id 9D4E6D34B8; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 15:29:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 23:29:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/doco] Adjust the normal_stop observer documentation Message-ID: <20030331232912.GH916@gnat.com> References: <20030331230556.GG916@gnat.com> <20030331231655.GA7931@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030331231655.GA7931@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00625.txt.bz2 > Have user breakpoint commands been executed at this point? How about > breakpoint conditions? If so, it suggests that the cache management > you wanted for Ada needs to be done at an earlier observation point, > perhaps corresponding to each _actual_ stop as opposed to each user > visible stop. Otherwise "info tasks" in a breakpoint commands list may > behave strangely... Hmmm, the documentation should definitely include this information, so the patch is withdrawn. I believe that the stop occurs before the commands, but I need to double-check this. Regarding the breakpoint conditions, I am not sure, I think the notification is occuring after the condition is evaluated, but will also double-check. Thanks for the comments! -- Joel