From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2074 invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2003 18:30:30 -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 2067 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2003 18:30:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Oct 2003 18:30:29 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 418162B89; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 14:30:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F8D9246.6030205@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:30:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Snyder Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8] References: <20031008165534.GA8718@nevyn.them.org> <20031008190502.GA13579@nevyn.them.org> <3F846B04.2070801@redhat.com> <3F85B4AC.7000000@redhat.com> <20031014013831.GB6118@nevyn.them.org> <3F8C18DD.3020508@redhat.com> <20031014155126.GA10669@nevyn.them.org> <3F8C605E.1060604@redhat.com> <3F8D6181.6070409@redhat.com> <3F8D8FEB.8020305@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00496.txt.bz2 > > > > This is needed, as otherwize something apparently simple "break strcmp" could result in the user unknowingly setting 1000's of breakpoints. > > That's true as it is -- I guess what we have now is that > pop-up menu that says "Which one of these did you mean?" > I presume that when that interface was implemented, we > did not expect it to come up all that often. Now, with > overloaded functions, templates, weird constructors and > so forth, we anticipate that it will come up more often, > so we need a less intrusive interface. I'd hazard a guess that the current breakpoint interface and mechanism pre-date GCC's inline support (which is well before GCC's C++ support)! enjoy, Andrew