From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15169 invoked by alias); 5 May 2008 19:41:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 15157 invoked by uid 22791); 5 May 2008 19:41:52 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 May 2008 19:41:33 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A39E3980F7; Mon, 5 May 2008 19:41:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 729A698060; Mon, 5 May 2008 19:41:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Jt6Z0-0005Ul-OW; Mon, 05 May 2008 15:41:30 -0400 Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 20:57:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: vladimir@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] bpstat_do_actions in one place Message-ID: <20080505194130.GA20958@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , vladimir@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200804242002.03590.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <200805051304.05449.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <20080505114824.GB22274@caradoc.them.org> <200805051658.32272.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <20080505192315.GA19885@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) 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: 2008-05/txt/msg00217.txt.bz2 On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 10:38:27PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > So it "discards the remaining output". But this `q' is not a command, > just a one-letter response (GDB doesn't care what follows the initial > `q'), just like it's sibling isn't a command, so there's no > reason to expect that it will have _any_ effect inside breakpoint > commands, or in any other context where GDB expects a command. Am I > missing something? I wasn't worried about embedding the q in the breakpoint commands list, but about what effect it has when the prompt is triggered by a command in the breakpoint command list. Basically, how far up the call stack is considered "the remaining output"? Since what it actually does is abort the command, not just discard the output. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery