Re: RFC: Fix "break *EXP thread NUM"

Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-11-24T14:24:19Z

On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 10:32:50AM +0000, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> Unfortunately, I can. :(
>
> It's also valid to say, for example:
>
> (gdb) b main t 999
> Unknown thread 999.

Neither documented nor tested :-( Do we want/need this functionality?

> or
>
> (gdb) b main thread -10
> Unknown thread -10.
>
> or indeed
>
> (gdb) b main thread +10
> Unknown thread 10.

Ditto, and these are much more trouble because thread +10 is a valid C
expression. Fortunately, thread numbers are always positive. Is this
useful?

I see that "task" is listed too now and should be added. And the
other parsers, including Ada, probably need similar work - except
there I don't know how to do it.

--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery