From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15149 invoked by alias); 13 Apr 2011 09:53:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 15140 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Apr 2011 09:53:36 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 09:53:26 +0000 Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q9wlI-0005zW-DE; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 05:53:24 -0400 Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 09:53:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Matt Rice CC: pedro@codesourcery.com, jan.kratochvil@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, tromey@redhat.com, sergiodj@redhat.com In-reply-to: (message from Matt Rice on Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:22:01 -0700) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] Introduce `pre_expanded sals' Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <201104121218.08910.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20110412115308.GA384@host1.jankratochvil.net> <201104121430.24596.pedro@codesourcery.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2011-04/txt/msg00183.txt.bz2 > Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:22:01 -0700 > From: Matt Rice > Cc: Jan Kratochvil , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Tom Tromey , Sergio Durigan Junior > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 6:30 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > > Another argument, > > is that frontends and users using them aren't expecting that a single > > breakpoint is represented by more than one visual "point", circle next to > > the sources, or something like that.  Hitting F8 to toggle a breakpoint's > > enablement changing some other location source "point" enablement > > in the sources not currently visible seems to break some abstration > > to me.  I think such design change needs to consider all these > > issues (and be experimented with some frontend). > > I think this "visual point" metaphor to some extent is already broken, > I more often than one might expect end up setting multiple breakpoints > on the same function > with different conditions and or commands. That's different: you are talking about several breakpoints at the same location, whereas the issue at hand is whether a single breakpoint could cover multiple source locations.