From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1166 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2009 16:59:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 1151 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Apr 2009 16:59:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.191) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:59:29 +0000 Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id a1so626997tib.12 for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:59:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.110.103.16 with SMTP id a16mr3055647tic.7.1239987566639; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:59:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090417155740.GU7585@adacore.com> References: <20090416173918.GP7557@adacore.com> <20090416235944.GP7585@adacore.com> <20090417155740.GU7585@adacore.com> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:59:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFA] print error message if (auto) disassembly failed From: Hui Zhu To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: 2009-04/txt/msg00449.txt.bz2 Agree with you. I will post a patch for it. Thanks, Hui On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 23:57, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> In before, when the user step into the program that don't have line >> message, =A0they will lost the the help from debuger. =A0They will not >> know what will happen in next except a pc address. > > IMO, the vast majority of gdb users will not care, or even understand > what the instruction means. Most of the time, the only reason I would > personally land in code that doesn't have any debugging info is when > attaching to a program, loading a core file, or pressing control-c. > In such cases, the first thing I usually do is "break ...; continue". > > I have very very very occasionally done stepi's that got me inside > such code, but in that case, I use a special user-defined command > that does the stepi and then prints the instruction. > >> For now, this auto will auto output the asm code. =A0I think it will >> make user experience (special for new user) better. >> And I think =A0Joel's patch fix the bug. > > It's not just about the bug, actually - I wasn't suggesting that > we change the default as a way to make it go away. Rather, I think > that this default setting will be useful to only very few people, > while at the same time creating the equivalent of noise for the > rest of the population. This is why I maintain my suggestion of > changing the default to "off". > > -- > Joel >