From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3959 invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2012 18:15:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 3942 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Sep 2012 18:15:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 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; Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:15:25 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q8AIFOTf015009 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 10 Sep 2012 14:15:24 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q8AIFNOI028154 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 10 Sep 2012 14:15:23 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: LRN Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [Bug win32/14529] Make gdb capable of JIT-debugging on W32 References: <503E575D.1000608@gmail.com> <83y5kvp0za.fsf@gnu.org> <5040DA38.2070802@gmail.com> <504D4EE1.5010507@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:15:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <504D4EE1.5010507@gmail.com> (LRN's message of "Mon, 10 Sep 2012 06:22:25 +0400") Message-ID: <87obldd9s4.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/msg00131.txt.bz2 >>>>> "LRN" == LRN writes: LRN> diff --git a/gdb/infcmd.c b/gdb/infcmd.c [...] LRN> +#if W32_JITDBG LRN> +void LRN> +signal_event_command (char *args, int from_tty) LRN> +{ Two notes here. First, does it make sense to put this in windows-nat.c instead? (I don't know anything about the Windows port...) It doesn't matter hugely. Second, it is odd to call this a _command and give it the above prototype. Normally this convention is used for things which are really commands -- visible to the user from the gdb CLI. I suppose this is so you can use catch_command_errors; but it seems like you could equally well use catch_errors. LRN> + struct cleanup *back_to = make_cleanup (null_cleanup, NULL); You don't need a null cleanup unless you plan to make other cleanups. But AFAICT there aren't any. LRN> + dont_repeat (); /* Not for the faint of heart */ You only need this for a real command. Tom