From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6105 invoked by alias); 7 May 2008 19:50:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 6097 invoked by uid 22791); 7 May 2008 19:50:53 -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; Wed, 07 May 2008 19:50:27 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 668BF9835A; Wed, 7 May 2008 19:50:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4475098011; Wed, 7 May 2008 19:50:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Jtpei-0003is-E0; Wed, 07 May 2008 15:50:24 -0400 Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 05:46:00 -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: <20080507195024.GA14007@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , vladimir@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20080505192315.GA19885@caradoc.them.org> <20080505194130.GA20958@caradoc.them.org> <20080506124322.GA12429@caradoc.them.org> <20080506183909.GA2696@caradoc.them.org> <20080507113736.GA32080@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/msg00269.txt.bz2 On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 03:55:42PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 11:02:38AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > That this instance of `backtrace' be aborted, and the loop will > > > continue. > > > > Interesting. That's not what I would expect; for instance, I'd > > expect an entire user-defined ("define") command to be aborted. > > What user-defined command? The example was about breakpoint commands, > not about a user-defined command defined by "define", wasn't it? They're all the same mechanism. For instance, define sillybt backtrace backtrace end If q should stop backtrace, IMO it should stop sillybt too. > > If that happened, how would you stop the example I gave? > > How would one stop _any_ endless loop? Ctrl-C, I guess. But it won't work. C-c is implemented as the exact same thing as typing q at a pagination prompt: eventually a quit exception is thrown. So you will only stop the currently printing backtrace and things will keep on going. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery