From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14244 invoked by alias); 4 Aug 2008 12:15:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 14052 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Aug 2008 12:15:34 -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, 04 Aug 2008 12:14:55 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C007E983A9; Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:14:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 424219839F; Mon, 4 Aug 2008 12:14:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KPyxg-0003dH-3R; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 08:14:52 -0400 Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 12:15:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Thiago Jung Bauermann , tromey@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA][patch 1/9] Yet another respin of the patch with initial Python support Message-ID: <20080804121451.GA13640@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , Thiago Jung Bauermann , tromey@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <1216245620.12209.18.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080718195010.GA14356@caradoc.them.org> <1216653969.31797.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080726173508.GA16470@caradoc.them.org> <1217818243.9336.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2008-05-11) 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: 2008-08/txt/msg00049.txt.bz2 On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 06:20:47AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I think what I suggested is still valid: no matter how the exception > is caught, it will still terminate the current command, won't it? > And, btw, do we actually have examples of such non-default exception > handling in GDB? About half the times that TRY_CATCH or catch_exception / catch_error are used, we handle an exception in a more specific way. Some are for cleanups, but many continue after e.g. a memory read error. The current action is terminated, but the action may be just part of a command. For example, if we have a Python implementation of a shared library list and the equivalent of current_sos throws an exception, that should not abort a "continue" command. For an example currently in GDB, TRY_CATCH (e, RETURN_MASK_ALL) { bpstat_do_actions (&stop_bpstat); } The actions associated with a breakpoint may terminate themselves, but not the surrounding command. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery