From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-53384-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 22275 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2008 21:25:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 22265 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2008 21:25:43 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:25:26 +0000
Received: (qmail 18731 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2008 21:25:23 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (jimb@127.0.0.2)   by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 16 Jan 2008 21:25:23 -0000
To: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
Cc: eliz@gnu.org,  brobecker@adacore.com (Joel Brobecker), 	  msnyder@specifix.com,  mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, 	  gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA?] Should break FILE:LINENO skip prologue?
References: <200801152140.m0FLeMha003566@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com>
From: Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:25:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <200801152140.m0FLeMha003566@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> (Ulrich Weigand's message of "Tue, 15 Jan 2008 22:40:22 +0100 (CET)")
Message-ID: <m3myr579a6.fsf@codesourcery.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-01/txt/msg00416.txt.bz2


"Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand at de.ibm.com> writes:
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> > Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 04:38:32 -0800
>> > From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
>> > 
>> > > By the way, has anyone tried *FILENAME:FUNCTION?  I'm surprised that
>> > > works, since it would have to be part of the C parser.
>> > 
>> > Confirmed - it doesn't work.
>> 
>> Which is a bug, IMO: if FUNCTION works, so should FILENAME:FUNCTION,
>> otherwise GDB is inconsistent in its treatment of locations specs.
>
> Actually, I disagree that this is inconsistent.  The point is that
> the EXPRESSION part of a *EXPRESSION location spec is *not* itself
> a location spec, but an *expression*.

I'd like to record my strong agreement with Uli here.  The expectation
that *FILENAME:FUNCTION ought to work is just a confusion that results
from thinking of *FUNCTION as a separate case from *EXPRESSION.
They're not separate: the first is a common application of the second,
in some languages.