From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3424 invoked by alias); 7 May 2012 18:56:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 3334 invoked by uid 22791); 7 May 2012 18:56:46 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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; Mon, 07 May 2012 18:56:30 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q47IuTjc001130 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 7 May 2012 14:56:29 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q47IuSOH012838 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 7 May 2012 14:56:28 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Siva Chandra Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Extend gdb.Breakpoint to allow setting a breakpoint at the current execution address References: <878vhh5gk8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 18:56:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Siva Chandra's message of "Tue, 1 May 2012 00:50:20 +0530") Message-ID: <878vh3yg4j.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.95 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain 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: 2012-05/txt/msg00186.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Siva" == Siva Chandra writes: Siva> Since gdb.Frame.pc works for me, I can drop this patch unless you feel Siva> it adds a "good-to-have". I think I'd prefer not to have it. To me, this functionality seems like it is possibly useful from the CLI, but for scripting it is simpler and clearer to just write out the full expression. Tom