From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28624 invoked by alias); 8 Oct 2003 20:30:34 -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 28617 invoked from network); 8 Oct 2003 20:30:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Oct 2003 20:30:33 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.22 #1 (Debian)) id 1A7Kx7-000488-0g; Wed, 08 Oct 2003 16:30:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 20:30:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Michael Snyder Subject: Re: RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8] Message-ID: <20031008203032.GA15860@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Jim Blandy , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Michael Snyder References: <20031008165534.GA8718@nevyn.them.org> <20031008190502.GA13579@nevyn.them.org> <3F846B04.2070801@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F846B04.2070801@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00256.txt.bz2 On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 03:52:36PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >On the infrastructure side we will be able to have an "impl_breakpoint" > >>> (short for implementation; better naming ideas?) for each location we > >>are > >>> watching using hardware watchpoints. This will simplify a lot of code. > >>It > >>> will also eventually become easier to object-orient our breakpoints. > > > >> > >>How about "user breakpoints" and "machine breakpoints"? > > > > > >I like it. > > Daniel, did you mention somewhere that the debugger book used "logical" > and "physical" breakpoint? If it does, it might be better to adopt its > terminology here. No, but Joel did. I'd rather not though; the name doesn't make as much sense to me as Jim's suggestion, and I don't think that the one book (even if it's close to the only book...) counts as enough of a precedent to set terminology. Jim even kindly gave me three paragraphs of explanatory verbiage describing what they are :) -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer