From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6025 invoked by alias); 27 Jul 2011 16:15:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 6009 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jul 2011 16:15:16 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 16:15:00 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p6RGExsC025955 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 12:14:59 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-20.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.20]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p6RGEvkO008145 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 27 Jul 2011 12:14:59 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p6RGEsHE025331; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 18:14:54 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p6RGEqOe024223; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 18:14:52 +0200 Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 16:23:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] canonical linespec and multiple breakpoints ... Message-ID: <20110727161449.GA25439@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20110505162855.GA2546@adacore.com> <83bozgmhil.fsf@gnu.org> <83k4dcd1bh.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) 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: 2011-07/txt/msg00765.txt.bz2 On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 21:53:15 +0200, Tom Tromey wrote: > So, a slightly different approach to solving this would be to make > breakpoints capture their location set at the "point of resolution" -- > either immediately, or for a pending breakpoint, the first time it hits. > Then, provide some additional syntax to make a "permanently pending" > breakpoint. I find it OK. With various lazy reads it may be more useful your unapplied read-debuginfos-by-background-thread patch. If it finds later an existing breakpoint could have another location in the newly read debuginfo it could warn the user s/he should use the "permanently pending" form next time. But that feature may be too far from now. Thanks, Jan