Re: RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8]

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 12:49:23AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2003 at 06:34:20PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 11:55:17 -0400
> > > From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
> > > 
> > > I get the feeling that the naming discussion has converged to:
> > > 
> > > 	"breakpoint" and "location"
> > 
> > Did it?  I (perhaps among others) suggested that, but I'm not sure
> > people agreed to it.
> > 
> > > Unlike the "user" vs "machine" I don't see us having much difficulty 
> > > explaining "breakpoint" and "location" to either users or developers.  Ya!
> > 
> > Obviously, I agree ;-)
> 
> Well, I haven't seen anyone disagree.
> 
> This was a wonderfully informative, if somewhat disordered, discussion. 
> I have a lot of messages flagged that I would still like to respond to,
> and I think I'll try to summarize the issues and alternatives discussed
> and mail them to gdb@, where this conversation should really happen.
> It'll be a little while; I haven't had much time for GDB lately.
> 
> Does anyone disagree with the "breakpoint" and "location" convention
> for now?  Michael, with the change from impl_breakpoint to bp_location,
> are the patches I posted OK?  Just let me know if you'd like me to
> update and repost them first.
> 
> I'd like to:
>   - get those cleanups cleaned up and in
>   - create a branch for more exploratory work; I think that to design
>     anything much beyond here I'm simply going to need more
>     implementation experience to talk from.
>   - then raise more conversation when I have a base to work on.

Ping.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer