From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21946 invoked by alias); 3 Nov 2003 18:00:39 -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 21933 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2003 18:00:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Nov 2003 18:00:37 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.24 #1 (Debian)) id 1AGj0E-0007vE-88; Mon, 03 Nov 2003 13:00:34 -0500 Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 18:00:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii , Andrew Cagney , msnyder@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8] Message-ID: <20031103180034.GA30427@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , Andrew Cagney , msnyder@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20031008165534.GA8718@nevyn.them.org> <3F92B3E5.8010209@gnu.org> <9003-Sun19Oct2003183420+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> <20031030054922.GA7434@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031030054922.GA7434@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00031.txt.bz2 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 > > > > > > 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