From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21187 invoked by alias); 11 Jan 2008 17:36:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 21176 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jan 2008 17:36:40 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:35:38 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JDNn5-0004C8-Go for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:35:35 +0000 Received: from 77.246.241.246 ([77.246.241.246]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:35:35 +0000 Received: from ghost by 77.246.241.246 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:35:35 +0000 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com From: Vladimir Prus Subject: Re: [BUG:MI] -break-list doesn't list multiple breakpoints Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:36:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <18310.38708.144719.374963@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit User-Agent: KNode/0.10.5 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: 2008-01/txt/msg00278.txt.bz2 Nick Roberts wrote: > > I have previously mentioned this in > > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2007-11/msg00276.html > > breakpoint.c currently has: Yes, we had this conversation before... > if (b->loc > && (b->loc->next || !b->loc->enabled)) > && !ui_out_is_mi_like_p (uiout)) > { > struct bp_location *loc; > int n = 1; > for (loc = b->loc; loc; loc = loc->next, ++n) > print_one_breakpoint_location (b, loc, n, last_addr); > } > > where presumably the !ui_out_is_mi_like_p (uiout) bit is there because the > testsuite failed without it, i.e., so that -break-insert only reports one > breakpoint (the CLI command "break" doesn't use > print_one_breakpoint_location). No, merely because I had no time to design MI interface. > On a more general note, in Emacs, I just just use "info break" after every > user > command and will probably just use "-break-list" in the future. I won't > use the output of -break-insert, although some front end might be clever > enough to do this and that presumably was the intention when the command > was written. In that case it might be necessary to include all the > locations in a multiple breakpoint in the output. > > Support for CLI in frontends can only be dropped after MI is fully > functional, it makes no sense to to do it before. I am not sure about your point. Clearly, MI needs some work still, but it's true for several years already. - Volodya