From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5086 invoked by alias); 1 Oct 2009 20:12:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 5077 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Oct 2009 20:12:39 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:12:32 +0000 Received: from int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n91KC8gY019992; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 16:12:08 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n91KC7nE003475; Thu, 1 Oct 2009 16:12:07 -0400 Message-ID: <4AC50D16.3000408@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:12:00 -0000 From: Phil Muldoon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090814 Fedora/3.0-2.6.b3.fc11 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: gdb-patches ml Subject: committed: Re: [patch] Add cleanup branch for std::terminate breakpoints in call_function_by_hand References: <4AC4D353.3010605@redhat.com> <20091001164439.GM10338@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20091001164439.GM10338@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00022.txt.bz2 On 10/01/2009 05:44 PM, Joel Brobecker wrote: Hi Joel, >> 2009-10-01 Phil Muldoon >> >> * infcall.c (call_function_by_hand): Add a new cleanup branch for >> std::terminate breakpoint. >> > This is OK for the HEAD, except for one minor tiny comment: > > >> + struct cleanup *terminate_bp_cleanup; >> > Can you initialize this to NULL? > Done, and committed. Thanks for the prompt review! Regards Phil