Re: [rfc] Allow watchpoints on inaccessible memory

Jim Blandy
2007-08-21T16:33:39Z

Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
> This is much nicer :-) Any opinions on this change? Also, does it
> deserve a NEWS entry and should it go in 6.7?

This is definitely very cool. Certainly watchpoints shouldn't refuse
to be set because their expression (currently) yields an error.

One thing I don't understand: why are the "always watch the outermost
value even if it is lazy" changes needed? The code that evaluates the
watchpoint condition should always simply unlazy the expression's
final value to begin with, so it'll never be lazy by the time the
other code sees it.