From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4008 invoked by alias); 24 Nov 2010 18:24:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 3999 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Nov 2010 18:24:19 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 18:24:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oAOINtRQ013814 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 24 Nov 2010 13:23:55 -0500 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAOINsRP011963; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 13:23:54 -0500 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oAOINrTA026943; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 13:23:54 -0500 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 79BD9378885; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:23:53 -0700 (MST) From: Tom Tromey To: Joel Brobecker Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: next/finish/etc -vs- exceptions References: <20101124175316.GA2634@adacore.com> Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 18:24:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20101124175316.GA2634@adacore.com> (Joel Brobecker's message of "Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:53:16 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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: 2010-11/txt/msg00397.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Joel" == Joel Brobecker writes: Joel> We are all so busy these days... When that happens, I suggest we Joel> avoid being too conservative on the HEAD, especially this far Joel> before the next branch creation. If you've already had Pedro's Joel> comments and you think you addressed them, how about going ahead? Joel> We can always revert later on... I will consider it. If I do it will not be until next week at the earliest. Tom> + case bp_exception_master: Tom> + /* These should never be enabled. */ Tom> + printf_filtered (_("Exception Master Breakpoint: gdb should not stop!\n")); Tom> + result = PRINT_NOTHING; Tom> + break; Joel> I understand that an assert or internal-error would be unnecessarily Joel> catastrophic for the user, but how about a warning instead? (just a Joel> thought - this is really cosmetic) I just copied what the other cases in that function do. Maybe they should be changed -- I am not sure. If so, that should be a separate patch. Tom> + /* Used for BPSTAT_WHAT_SET_LONGJMP_RESUME. True if we are Tom> + handling a longjmp, false if we are handling an exception. */ Tom> + int is_longjmp; Joel> This component is also used with BPSTAT_WHAT_CLEAR_LONGJMP_RESUME. Thanks, I updated my branch. Tom