Re: [PATCH] Don't give spurious warnings when using thread specific breakpoints

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 07:38:59PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > (gdb) b main
> > Breakpoint 1 at 0x439ee0
> > (gdb) b main
> > Note: breakpoint 1 also set at pc 0x439ee0.
> > Breakpoint 2 at 0x439ee0
> > (gdb) b main
> > Note: breakpoints 1 and 2 also set at pc 0x439ee0.
> > Breakpoint 3 at 0x439ee0
> > (gdb) disable 2
> > (gdb) b main
> > Note: breakpoints 1, 2 (disabled) and 3 also set at pc 0x439ee0.
> > Breakpoint 4 at 0x439ee0
> 
> We need to have different code branches, one each for each one of the
> possibilities, and each branch should have a format string for a full
> sentence that is produced by that branch.
> 
> If there are too many such possible combinations, then the i18n
> comment should explain the context, as I mentioned elsewhere.  (I'm
> quite sure we've been through a similar discussion a year or so ago,
> about another place where the code does similar things.)

And I'm pretty sure we concluded there wasn't a reasonable way to do
this... perhaps my example wasn't good enough.  Or perhaps I've
forgotten the trick to it.

(gdb) 
Note: breakpoints 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 also set at pc 0x439ee0.
Breakpoint 9 at 0x439ee0
(gdb) 
Note: breakpoints 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 also set at pc 0x439ee0.
Breakpoint 10 at 0x439ee0
(gdb) 
Note: breakpoints 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 also set at pc 0x439ee0.
Breakpoint 11 at 0x439ee0

There can be an arbitrary number of elements.  We build up the list
with ", " and ", and ", along with " (disabled)" and " (thread %d)".

It'd be easy to reduce the possibilities somewhat, by using "%d
(disabled)" and "%d (disabled) (thread %d)" and so forth.  But I'm
stumped what to do about the comma separated list.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery