From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-46854-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 13418 invoked by alias); 1 Jan 2007 03:52:13 -0000
Received: (qmail 13410 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jan 2007 03:52:13 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Jan 2007 03:52:07 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 	by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B697C48CE4B 	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:52:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1])  by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP  id 15613-01-4 for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>;  Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:52:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from takamaka.act-europe.fr (AStDenis-105-1-75-95.w80-8.abo.wanadoo.fr [80.8.212.95]) 	by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030E448CE01 	for <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>; Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:52:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) 	id 1583834C099; Mon,  1 Jan 2007 07:52:49 +0400 (RET)
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2007 03:52:00 -0000
From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Two identical "else if" blocks ?
Message-ID: <20070101035248.GE3428@adacore.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg00003.txt.bz2

Hello,

While reviewing everyone comments regarding the patch for catching
Ada exceptions, I noticed the following code in remove_breakpoint:

  else if ((b->owner->type == bp_catch_catch || 
            b->owner->type == bp_catch_throw)
           && breakpoint_enabled (b->owner)
           && !b->duplicate)
    {
      val = target_remove_breakpoint (&b->target_info);
      if (val)
        return val;
      b->inserted = (is == mark_inserted);
    }
  else if (ep_is_exception_catchpoint (b->owner)
           && b->inserted       /* sometimes previous insert doesn't happen */
           && breakpoint_enabled (b->owner)
           && !b->duplicate)
    {
      val = target_remove_breakpoint (&b->target_info);
      if (val)
        return val;

      b->inserted = (is == mark_inserted);
    }

Since ep_is_exception_catchpoint is:

  return (ep->type == bp_catch_catch) || (ep->type == bp_catch_throw);

It looks like the two blocks are completely identical, and we should
be able to remove one of them. Should I perhaps test what happens
when I delete, say, the first one?

-- 
Joel