From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22081 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2002 20:33:47 -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 22069 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2002 20:33:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 29 Aug 2002 20:33:46 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 057A33DFE; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 16:33:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D6E8527.3060904@ges.redhat.com> Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 13:37:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kevin Buettner Cc: Joel Brobecker , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/controversial] move bp by line number past the prologue References: <20020829181524.GC971@gnat.com> <1020829201635.ZM24274@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00997.txt.bz2 > On Aug 29, 11:15am, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > >> 2002-08-29 Jim Ingham >> >> * linespec.c (decode_line_1): Skip the function prologue if >> funfirstline is set. Changes the behavior of the break command >> to skip the function prologue when breaking by line number. > > > Joel, > > My opinion is that this is a reasonable change providing that we > still have a mechanism for setting a breakpoint on the prologue. > When I want to do this I usually do ``b *foo'' instead of relying > on line numbers. (Usually I don't know the line number anyway.) > So, I have no objection to this patch so long as it doesn't change > the present behavior of ``b *foo''. > > I've reread the thread in which this matter was discussed earlier > (i.e, the "[RFC] breakpoints and function prologues" messages). Given > that there was such disagreement before, I doubt that everyone will > agree with my point of view. If this turns out to be the case, might > I suggest a user settable option for controlling whether setting a > breakpoint by line number will always cause the prologue to be > skipped? That way both sides get the behavior they want. (GUIs can > set the desired behavior at initialization time.) GUI and CLI behavior should be kept independant. Running GDB under a GUI, should not affect the CLI. Andrew