From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19338 invoked by alias); 1 Jun 2005 11:30:27 -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 19198 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jun 2005 11:30:06 -0000 Received: from lakermmtao06.cox.net (HELO lakermmtao06.cox.net) (68.230.240.33) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2005 11:30:06 +0000 Received: from white ([68.9.64.121]) by lakermmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050601113004.DCBX749.lakermmtao06.cox.net@white>; Wed, 1 Jun 2005 07:30:04 -0400 Received: from bob by white with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1DdRQC-0004PZ-00; Wed, 01 Jun 2005 07:30:04 -0400 Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 11:30:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi To: Nick Roberts Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hooks still needed for annotations Message-ID: <20050601113004.GC15414@white> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <17053.24737.153388.915345@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17053.24737.153388.915345@farnswood.snap.net.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00006.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jun 01, 2005 at 07:15:45PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > > On 2004-04-21 the lines below were added to clear_interpreter_hooks in > interps.c: > > deprecated_delete_breakpoint_hook = 0; > deprecated_modify_breakpoint_hook = 0; > > Previously they were set to breakpoint_changed (a more natural name would be > annotate_breakpoints_invalid). This means that sometimes breakpoints-invalid > annotations aren't generated. In particular this is the case when a breakpoint > is toggled between its enabled state and disabled state. > > Although the intention is to eventually remove annotations I don't think this > stage has been reached yet and it makes little sense to remove a small > number of calls. The patch below re-instates them. Nick, in order for you to guarentee that your Emacs is working properly, you are going to have to update the breakpoints after every command the user types. Even though I think adding the patch is a good idea, if you don't update the breakpoints after every command, bugs like this will make it so that some users do not get the updated breakpoints. For instance, make a small main program, add a breakpoint, and then immediatly delete it. I doubt you will get the breakpoints-invalid annotation. The problem is, even if you fix them, you still have to check the breakpoints after every command unless you query GDB for it's version number to see if the bug is fixed. Bob Rossi