Re: Status of 'blacklist' patch?

[Justin Lebar <justin.lebar@gmail.com>]

Ah, I missed that "!".  Thanks!

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 October 2011 20:51:31, Justin Lebar wrote:
>> > Justin> +  if (arg != 0)
>> > Justin> +    {
>> > Justin> +      entry_num = parse_and_eval_long (arg);
>> > Justin> +    }
>> >
>> > This will parse and evaluate an expression.  I think something like what
>> > "info break" does would be more in keeping with other places in gdb --
>> > that is, use get_number_or_range, then iterate.
>>
>> breakpoint_1 calls parse_and_eval_long:
>>
>>           if (allflag && parse_and_eval_long (args) != b->number)
>>             continue;
>>           if (!allflag && !number_is_in_list (args, b->number))
>>             continue;
>>
>> Do we want to copy the breakpoint code here, or not?
>
> Yes. :-)  ALLFLAG being true means breakpoint_1 is being called
> to implement the "maint info breakpoints" command, which needs to
> handle negative breakpoint numbers, which are not visible to the
> regular "info breakpoints" command.  That uses parse_and_eval_long
> because ranges can't handle negative numbers.  When ALLFLAG is false,
> that code is implementing the "info breakpoints" command, and that
> you'll notice the number_is_in_list call, which is a wrapper around
> get_number_or_range.  If you make your code use number_is_in_list,
> you'll get e.g., "info skip 1-10 12 30" support for free.
>
> --
> Pedro Alves
>