On Friday 28 September 2007 00:49:07 Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Vladimir Prus <vladimir@codesourcery.com>
> > Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 22:27:34 +0400
> > Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> > 
> > > > +pending breakpoint that never had its address known,
> > > 
> > > I think this is better:
> > > 
> > >   For a pending address whose address is not yet known,
> > 	          ^^^^^^^
> > 
> > Did you mean "breakpoint" instead of first "address"?
> 
> Yes, sorry.
> 
> > > Example, please.  A picture is worth a thousand words.
> > 
> > I've added one. Is example with a line as long as 75 characters OK?
> 
> @smallexample can handle this (which is why we use it instead of
> @example).
> 
> > Thanks for review. I attach the revised version.
> 
> It's fine, except for a few small gotchas:
> 
> > +It is possible that a breakpoints correspond to several locations 
>                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> "a breakpoint corresponds".
> 
> > +For a C@t{++} constructor, the gcc compiler generates several
>                                   ^^^
> You forgot to replace with @value{NGCC}.
> 
> > +by one row for each breakpoint location. The header row
>                                           ^^
> Still only one space.
> 
> > +any shared library is loaded or unloaded. Typically, you would
>                                            ^^
> And here.

Thanks. I've checked in the attached.

- Volodya