Re: [rfa/testsuite] gdb1250.exp: make 'break abort' work with new pending breakpoints

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Mon, Feb 09, 2004 at 05:45:45PM -0500, Michael Chastain wrote:
> > None of that reference was in your message, and I don't run tests with
> > binutils HEAD regularly...
> 
> No big deal.  I wrote to binutils@ when it happened, and I've been
> whining it about it my "60 versus HEAD" comparisons.  I figured it
> was just information overload.
> 
> If you could take a look at pr gdb/1470 now just to get it into your L2
> cache I'd be grateful.
> 
> > I suppose.  I don't much care either way though the new parameter seems
> > awkward to me - isn't the _with_pending in the name enough?
> 
> My intuition says "no".  An interface with a parameter is more flexible.
> 
> But my intuition can be wrong, and my taste can be misguided.

I think the options are:
  gdb_breakpoint_with_pending_flag "main" "yes"
  gdb_breakpoint "main" "yes"
  gdb_breakpoint_with_pending "main"

Hmm, that second one is nice.  Or:
  gdb_breakpoint "main" {allow-pending}
  runto "main" {allow-pending}

How do you feel about that?  This is TCL, after all, we can use it.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer