From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2647 invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2003 22:00:32 -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 2606 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2003 22:00:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Oct 2003 22:00:31 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (nat-pool-rdu-dmz.redhat.com [172.16.52.200] (may be forged)) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9FM0UM16247 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:00:30 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9FM0IL26475; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:00:24 -0400 Received: from redhat.com (reddwarf.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.50]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h9FM0IJ07262; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:00:18 -0700 Message-ID: <3F8DC372.8000905@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 22:00:00 -0000 From: Michael Snyder Organization: Red Hat, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain CC: ezannoni@redhat.com, ac131313@redhat.com, drow@mvista.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: Breakpoint infrastructure cleanups [0/8] References: <200310151948.h9FJm0W2025223@duracef.shout.net> In-Reply-To: <200310151948.h9FJm0W2025223@duracef.shout.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-10/txt/msg00506.txt.bz2 Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote: > My two cents: > > It's not just breakpoints. What happens when the user types: > > (gdb) disassemble Foo::Foo That's true -- or taking a step back, we currently use one semantics (and syntax) for all commands that take a source location as an argument (basicly break and list). Are we going to 'break' that? I think it's OK to do so, because for list, you really do mean a source location, whereas for break, you may mean many target locations. Disassemble doesn't share the same syntax/semantics (decode_line_1); it has its own (I think?) -- but you're right, it's another command that takes a source location and "translates" it into a target location. > Also, here is a use case to consider: > > (gdb) break *0x12345678 > > gdb has this notion that one source address corresponds to one > object-code address, but now it's one source address corresponds > to N object-code addresses. Now I don't follow you. "*0x12345678" isn't a source address. Is it? Unles you've got multiple memory address spaces or something... something more deviant than just Harvard, which we already know how to handle.