Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
Cc: Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com>,
	Don Howard <dhoward@redhat.com>,
	gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFA] deleting breakpoints inside of 'commands' [Repost]
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:34:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3BA7859F.4F7ACFA2@cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3BA7608F.3040104@cygnus.com>

Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> >> Is it worth the effort?  Is this duplication costly
> >> compared to everything else already being done by
> >> bpstat_do_actions?  Or am I worrying over nothing?
> 
> I think this is in the noise.  GDB has performance problems with very
> large symbol files, it doesn't have problems with 3 line breakpoint scripts.

I know GDB has performance problems with symbols, but I do not
know that it doesn't have performance problems with executing
command lists.  I know that when I used to work on the XRAY
debugger, macro performance was a really big issue, whereas
no one seems to have talked about it much in GDB... 


> > I share your concerns.  And I see no reason why this should be allowed
> > --
> > the script can always "disable" its own breakpoint with the same effect
> > for all practical purposes.
> >
> > A patch adding a "cannot delete self" error message would be nice.
> 
> I would really rather not see GDB introduce, undocumented, edge
> conditions like this.  I think the patch Don submitted had the very nice
> effect of eliminating the need for such a special case.

Obviously it would be bad for it to be undocumented.
But I do not agree that the restriction:

	a breakpoint command set cannot delete itself

is particularly ugly.  Obviously it would be (at least a little)
better to _not_ have such a restriction, but there is always
a cost/benefit analysis to these questions.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-09-18 10:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-09-17  9:34 Don Howard
2001-09-17 15:39 ` Michael Snyder
2001-09-18  6:56   ` Fernando Nasser
2001-09-18  7:56     ` Andrew Cagney
2001-09-18  8:09       ` Fernando Nasser
2001-09-18 10:34       ` Michael Snyder [this message]
2001-09-18 17:47         ` Andrew Cagney
2001-09-18 18:03           ` Michael Snyder
2001-09-19  7:20             ` Fernando Nasser
2001-09-19  8:17               ` Andrew Cagney
2001-09-19  9:22                 ` Fernando Nasser
2001-09-19 11:44                   ` PRMS not TODO: " Andrew Cagney
2001-09-19  9:33                 ` Don Howard
2001-09-19 12:08                   ` Kevin Buettner
2001-09-19 12:18                     ` Michael Snyder
2001-09-19 13:09                       ` Kevin Buettner
     [not found]                     ` <3BA905AD.5F8F1A68@redhat.com>
2001-09-19 14:22                       ` Kevin Buettner
2001-09-19 14:44                         ` Fernando Nasser
2001-09-20 15:24                 ` Don Howard
2001-09-20 18:05                   ` Andrew Cagney
     [not found] <Pine.LNX.4.33.0109211638230.1755-100000@theotherone>
2001-09-24 17:10 ` Kevin Buettner
2001-09-24 17:33   ` Kevin Buettner
2001-09-24 18:52   ` Andrew Cagney
2001-09-26 13:07     ` Fernando Nasser
2001-09-26 14:20       ` Kevin Buettner
2001-09-26 14:57         ` Fernando Nasser
2001-09-26 15:09           ` Andrew Cagney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3BA7859F.4F7ACFA2@cygnus.com \
    --to=msnyder@cygnus.com \
    --cc=ac131313@cygnus.com \
    --cc=dhoward@redhat.com \
    --cc=fnasser@redhat.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox