Re: [PATCH 0/5] Return error code in get_number

Tom Tromey
2014-05-15T17:58:18Z

Tom> It seems to me that an MI client already knows all the breakpoint
Tom> numbers. I'm having trouble picturing the scenario where I'd want my MI
Tom> client to use a convenience variable instead.

Yao> This facilitates writing MI test cases that we don't have to hard-code
Yao> breakpoint numbers anymore. Keith pointed this out in the review
Yao> https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2014-01/msg00824.html and I think
Yao> that is good to have, so I write this patch series. Can this justify
Yao> the changes in this series?

I am not opposed to it but I would like to gently push back a little.

It seems to me that if the proposed patches are there to help with a
deficiency in the test suite, then it would be better to fix the test
suite. Say, by implementing a way to extract the breakpoint number and
make it available to the Tcl code. Did you consider this approach? And
if so what made you reject it?

Tom