From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20286 invoked by alias); 18 Sep 2012 17:36:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 20165 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Sep 2012 17:36:58 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS 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; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:36:39 +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 q8IHabZU025670 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:36:37 -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 q8IHaZXr014113 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:36:36 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] wrong language used when re-setting breakpoint References: <1347928803-15526-1-git-send-email-brobecker@adacore.com> <87k3vrxu2o.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <20120918150542.GD3276@adacore.com> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:36:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20120918150542.GD3276@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:05:43 -0700") Message-ID: <87d31jxmfw.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (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: 2012-09/txt/msg00369.txt.bz2 Joel> I kind of agree, but ... at the same time, this type of changes then Joel> makes it harder for us to make progress in getting rid of the Joel> current_language global, no? Nope, sorry, what I'm suggesting is diagnosing and fixing this problem first, then putting your patch in subsequently. Joel> Also, I think that relying on the global being set for a defined period Joel> of time is a little risky. It seems too easy for the current_language Joel> to change right from under us as a side-effect of some sub-action. Yes, I agree, and I think that's why the direction linespec is headed is a good one. But, temporarily setting current_language is how gdb has worked for a long time, and if that broke, it probably means a regression or bug elsewhere. And, linespec isn't actually fully parameterized like this anyway. Tom