From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22745 invoked by alias); 30 Jan 2008 07:22:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 22735 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Jan 2008 07:22:55 -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; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:22:35 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JK7HE-0000Ah-8A for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:22:32 +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 ; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:22:32 +0000 Received: from ghost by 77.246.241.246 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:22:32 +0000 To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com From: Vladimir Prus Subject: Re: [BUG:MI] -break-list doesn't list multiple breakpoints Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:32:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <18310.38708.144719.374963@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <18336.7948.316240.708346@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/msg00771.txt.bz2 Nick Roberts wrote: > > > > > > As an alternative, I guess this line alone could be removed so > > > > > > that -break-insert lists the multiple breakpoint locations > > > > > > being set and the adjust MI documentation to explain this. > > > > > > > > > > We should check what the new MI output looks like, and see if it > > > > > breaks Emacs / Eclipse / Kdevelop. It might be that easy. > > > > > > > > It won't break Emacs becuase it doesn't use the output of > > > > -break-insert. > > > > > > If the new output from -break-list works OK, that is. > > > > It would be nice to actually *see* the examples of that new output ;-) > > My theory (and why I did not implemented that for MI), is that > > frontends will start showing breakpoint locations as if they were > > individual breakpoint which is likely will fail. To begin with, if > > frontend uses integer to represent breakpoint id, then "1.1" location > > id won't be representable. > > The manual doesn't state that the breakpoint number will be a integer. The manual fails to state lots of things, so frontend naturally make various assumptions. > Without the file and line information, the frontend can't display > breakpoint icons or display the relevant source in a window, which must be > worse. Given that such a change has a potential to totally break frontend, I'm not sure we can talk in the abstract. If you send me the most recent version of your patch, I can see if KDevelop will be happy, or not. - Volodya