From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26472 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2008 10:35:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 26463 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2008 10:35:14 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:34:55 +0000 Received: from brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.1/8.14.0) with ESMTP id m0GAYg5T010086; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:34:42 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id m0GAYfpk000326; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:34:41 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:35:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200801161034.m0GAYfpk000326@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: eliz@gnu.org CC: uweigand@de.ibm.com, brobecker@adacore.com, msnyder@specifix.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:20:29 +0200) Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA?] Should break FILE:LINENO skip prologue? References: <200801152140.m0FLeMha003566@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> 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: 2008-01/txt/msg00394.txt.bz2 > Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:20:29 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii > > > Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 22:40:22 +0100 (CET) > > From: "Ulrich Weigand" > > Cc: brobecker@adacore.com (Joel Brobecker), msnyder@specifix.com, > > mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 04:38:32 -0800 > > > > From: Joel Brobecker > > > > > > > > > By the way, has anyone tried *FILENAME:FUNCTION? I'm surprised that > > > > > works, since it would have to be part of the C parser. > > > > > > > > Confirmed - it doesn't work. > > > > > > Which is a bug, IMO: if FUNCTION works, so should FILENAME:FUNCTION, > > > otherwise GDB is inconsistent in its treatment of locations specs. > > > > Actually, I disagree that this is inconsistent. The point is that > > the EXPRESSION part of a *EXPRESSION location spec is *not* itself > > a location spec, but an *expression*. > > You are talking from the GDB code point of views, while I'm talking > from the user point of view. > > Btw, the manual does not say *EXPRESSION, it says *ADDRESS. That's fine as long as the manual says that ADDRESS is parsed as an expression in the current language. Probably writing *ADDRESS in the manual is better since it makes clear that whatever follows the '*' is interpreted as an address. > Anyway, if "break *FILENAME:FUNCTION" does not need to work, then how > does one set a breakpoint on the entry point of FILENAME:FUNCTION, > after the suggested change that makes "break FUNCTION" behave > differently than "break *FUNCTION"? Joel's change does not change how "break FUNCTION" works at all. It changes what "break LINE" does in the case where LINE doesn't correspond to an actual line of source code, and makes it more similar to what "break FUNCTION" does, which is putting the breakpoint on the first line of actual code in a function.