Re: [PATCH 2/6] Introduce `pre_expanded sals'

Tom Tromey
2011-08-04T20:41:07Z

>>>>> "Sergio" == Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com> writes:

Tom> Yesterday I started wondering if this patch series could go in if
Tom> re-expressed as catchpoints.

Sergio> IMHO this is OK. I would prefer to see this command as a breakpoint
Sergio> because I have always seen catchpoints as "event-oriented breakpoints",
Sergio> such as the calling/returning of a syscall, or a fork, or exec.

Yeah, I think this distinction generally makes sense.

However, I thought of one other reason we might prefer a catchpoint: if
we add "objfile:"-style linespecs ("break libc.so:malloc"), then we are
going to run into trouble if anybody tries to debug a program named
"probe" -- because "break probe:spec" is handled pretty early in
linespec.

Let me know what you think. In the absence of comments I am going to
implement this.

Tom