From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13556 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2008 14:40:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 13547 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Jun 2008 14:40:24 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Jun 2008 14:40:06 +0000 Received: (qmail 24555 invoked from network); 2 Jun 2008 14:40:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (vladimir@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 2 Jun 2008 14:40:04 -0000 From: Vladimir Prus To: Aleksandar Ristovski , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/MI] Implementation for break-catch command Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 14:40:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 References: <200806010914.22980.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <4843F425.90809@qnx.com> In-Reply-To: <4843F425.90809@qnx.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200806021839.54573.vladimir@codesourcery.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: 2008-06/txt/msg00006.txt.bz2 On Monday 02 June 2008 17:22:45 you wrote: > Vladimir Prus wrote: > > On Sunday 01 June 2008 03:40:06 Nick Roberts wrote: > >> > >> I think all these "breakpoints" should be changed to use observers. This > >> seems to just add to the ugliness. > > > > They definitely should. > > Well then, what is the preferred way? I can tweak my patch to > take your comments into consideration, but if a switch to observers is > going to happen soon, then I guess the break-catch should get > this new stuff right away? Implementing observer_notify for all the breakpoints > would break the compatibility and require quite a bit of work on the testsuite side. > > Either way, Vladimir, it's your call - let me know. I don't think you should worry about observers -- your patch makes a nice self-contained improvement, and it does not make sense to mix it with any other cleanups. For now, using hooks is fine, and my comment about observers does not call for any changes in this patch. I don't think any of my comments will be invalidated when we switch to observers. Thanks, Volodya