From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25243 invoked by alias); 8 Apr 2010 21:45:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 25232 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Apr 2010 21:45:11 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:45:06 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD3202BABEF; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:45:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id wd-Hfbk0rYec; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:45:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C35362BABF1; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:45:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 291A0F58C2; Thu, 8 Apr 2010 14:44:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:45:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Phil Muldoon Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches ml , Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: [patch][python] Add breakpoint support. Message-ID: <20100408214455.GM19194@adacore.com> References: <4BB0B063.6000600@redhat.com> <20100405162648.GD19194@adacore.com> <4BBB3AF6.8050407@redhat.com> <4BBDCF0E.9020904@redhat.com> <20100408152905.GK19194@adacore.com> <4BBE32FF.8090508@redhat.com> <4BBE4A34.3020301@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4BBE4A34.3020301@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-04/txt/msg00196.txt.bz2 > > I think the more difficult problem is deciding how users should activate > > commands written in Python. Right now for Archer we have this "require" > > thing, but that seems like kind of a hack. OTOH, loading all the > > commands at startup also seems weird. It will make startup slower, for > > one thing. Maybe we could implement some kind of auto-loading? > > I normally (I think -- it's been awhile) just end up loading these with > execfile in my .gdbinit. I cannot remember now. Anyway, it is not > optimal. This is indeed a general issue that is worth looking at. But for the specific case of breakpoint saving/restoring, can we just add a couple of methods to the breakpoints class? The downside is that the code has to be written in C, I guess, as opposed to python. Hmmm, we want the glue code to be as minimal, right? -- Joel