From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-82079-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 2973 invoked by alias); 5 Jul 2011 20:41:05 -0000
Received: (qmail 2965 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jul 2011 20:41:04 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il (HELO mtaout20.012.net.il) (80.179.55.166)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 20:40:49 +0000
Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LNV00K00MMAFH00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 23:40:43 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.8.216]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LNV00JTDO3RF0I0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 23:40:41 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 21:07:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] canonical linespec and multiple breakpoints ...
In-reply-to: <m31uy4tu2y.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
To: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Message-id: <83d3hopink.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <20110505162855.GA2546@adacore.com> <m3oc3gx48l.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83bozgmhil.fsf@gnu.org> <m3oc2pxjds.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83k4dcd1bh.fsf@gnu.org> <m3r56bdoh9.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <m362nmarbv.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83fwmpqjem.fsf@gnu.org> <m31uy4tu2y.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg00174.txt.bz2

> From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 13:18:13 -0600
> 
> Eli> (As for the command name, I'd suggest "location N LINESPEC", btw.)
> 
> I wanted a way to also change the 'silent' flag.

And I wanted it to be consistent with how we modify breakpoints today,
once they are set ("conditions", "commands", "enable", etc.).

I'm okay with having one command for that, but then we should lump all
those into it, too, for consistency.

> It occurred to me last night that we could use "set" instead of
> "modify":
> 
>     set breakpoint N location LINESPEC
>     set breakpoint N silent [on|off]

Also possible (although currently we use that for minor options), but
again, we should then add command, conditions, etc. to that as well.

> Eli> You say nothing about watchpoints.  Will they also use the same
> Eli> infrastructure?
> 
> I don't think it is necessary.  "watch" doesn't take a linespec
> argument.

But they can be ambiguous as well.