From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23869 invoked by alias); 6 Apr 2013 21:49:54 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 23859 invoked by uid 89); 6 Apr 2013 21:49:54 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Sat, 06 Apr 2013 21:49:51 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r36LnlpF005854 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:49:47 -0400 Received: from valrhona.uglyboxes.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r36Lnkb4018131 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 6 Apr 2013 17:49:47 -0400 Message-ID: <5160987A.5030308@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 07:56:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130311 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: Hui Zhu , Tom Tromey , Hui Zhu , gdb-patches ml Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix create pending breakpoint handle extra_string issue if not parse_condition_and_thread References: <514E8D6C.2010606@mentor.com> <514EEB43.6040101@redhat.com> <87620ftn9f.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <515092F2.2000307@redhat.com> <515F0EED.4040105@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <515F0EED.4040105@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-04/txt/msg00168.txt.bz2 On 04/05/2013 10:50 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > I think you're on the right track here. That's good to know. :-) Honestly, though, that was just meant as an example -- not a definitive solution to the problem. > That'd mean that e.g., for a future MI dprintf command, we'd accept > the remainder of ARG as extra string. Gah. I totally spaced on MI. > I made it "parse_arg", as that'll remain stable even > when more explicit parameters are added, and, > > break_command_1: > > create_breakpoint (get_current_arch (), > arg, > NULL, 0, NULL, 1 /* parse arg */, > > we even have comments calling it that already too. A very welcome change. > WDYT? It looks good to me. Thank you again for your review of my review. Hopefully next time I'll be a bit better at it! Keith