From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3427 invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2002 18:28:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 3420 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2002 18:28:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 17 Jun 2002 18:28:04 -0000 Received: from cygnus.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3C463CFF; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 14:28:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D0E2A33.7060706@cygnus.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 11:28:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020613 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Keith Seitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC/MI] Event Records vs Commands References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-06/txt/msg00304.txt.bz2 >> If breakpoint-create included complete breakpoint information an >> additional roundtrip could be avoided. Is this significant? I suspect >> this is a question for some of the apple hackers as they would have a >> better feel for how critical this one is :-) > > > I don't really think a breakpoint query is going to do too much, but if > we want to keep it, we certainly can. All I would need to do is make the > code more event friendly. So for the first cut - just return the breakpoint number. Then, if performance provdes to be a problem, update it to include the other info. Ok. Andrew