From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10719 invoked by alias); 9 Oct 2003 14:08:49 -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 10712 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2003 14:08:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 9 Oct 2003 14:08:49 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.22 #1 (Debian)) id 1A7bTE-0007i9-Mr for ; Thu, 09 Oct 2003 10:08:48 -0400 Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 14:08:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8] Message-ID: <20031009140848.GA29621@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20031008165534.GA8718@nevyn.them.org> <20031008190502.GA13579@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00295.txt.bz2 On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 08:10:46AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:05:02 -0400 > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > > > > > (gdb) info break > > > Num Type Disp Enb Address What > > > 1 breakpoint keep y 0x08048354 in foo::foo (in-charge) at hello.c:8 > > > 0x08048364 in foo::foo (not-in-charge) at hello.c:8 > > > (gdb) > > > > Here's the problem that I see. > > > > For foo::foo, there are two of these things. Having them both in the > > list would be nice. Really nice. > > > > For inline_accessor_fn there are 3.8 million. In addition to needing > > to do a whole lot of work on GDB internals before we could survive this > > (memory usage; ptrace thrashing inserting and removing them; linked > > lists of breakpoints; and that's just the beginning) this has some > > severe user interface implications. We don't want to print out all > > those addresses by default! > > > > I'm open to suggestions on how to deal with this. > > How about a switch to "info break"? By default, show only the > in-charge breakpoint, but if the user says "info break -all" or some > such, show the other 3.8 million minus one. >From a user interface perspective, I got a really strong negative pushback the last time I tried to add a switch to any GDB command. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer