From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27289 invoked by alias); 1 Jan 2007 16:19:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 27223 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jan 2007 16:19:22 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Jan 2007 16:19:17 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H1PsZ-0003Wr-G8; Mon, 01 Jan 2007 11:19:15 -0500 Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2007 16:19:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] Add support for catch Ada exceptions Message-ID: <20070101161914.GA13508@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20061230032111.GB27642@adacore.com> <20061231213707.GA26604@nevyn.them.org> <20070101044301.GF3428@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070101044301.GF3428@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg00023.txt.bz2 On Mon, Jan 01, 2007 at 08:43:01AM +0400, Joel Brobecker wrote: > It would be nice indeed if the same command was able to handle exceptions > from both languages. I think that we should postpone this for a little > later, though. From what I've seen in the GDB code, we would need to > create breakpoints with multiple locations. Correct. Or, multiple hidden "internal" breakpoints (negative indexes) corresponding to the user visible catchpoint. But it's probably easier to wait until support for breakpoints with multiple locations is more ready. > What we can do, however, when we are able to have the same command > handle both C++ and Ada exception is have one be the alias of the other. > That way, both C++ and Ada programers have a command that feels natural > to them. Yes, that's exactly what I would recommend. I understand the value of the terms you've got. > Implementing the equivalent of "catch catch" for Ada is not possible > at the moment, not using breakpoints. We do not have a marker we can > break on like you do in C++. OK; thanks for checking. > Hiding the condition is not a big deal. If needed, I can use a bit > from the breakpoint flag, don't you think. I didn't even know that was there. Yes, that would be fine. I would recommend separating it into a bitfield, too. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery