From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11924 invoked by alias); 7 Aug 2009 17:46:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 11902 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Aug 2009 17:45:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Aug 2009 17:45:48 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n77Hjkpq021494 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 13:45:46 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n77HjktG007153 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 13:45:46 -0400 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 n77HjjnP008260; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 13:45:45 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 47A8137858F; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 11:45:45 -0600 (MDT) To: Vladimir Prus Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Simplify MI breakpoint setting References: <200908011113.32939.vladimir@codesourcery.com> From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 18:52:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200908011113.32939.vladimir@codesourcery.com> (Vladimir Prus's message of "Sat\, 1 Aug 2009 11\:13\:32 +0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.3 (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: 2009-08/txt/msg00115.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Volodya" == Vladimir Prus writes: Volodya> Further, set_breakpoint appears to be trivial and useless Volodya> wrapper over break_command_really. This patch cleans that Volodya> up. Are breakpoint.{c,h} changes OK? I think the point of this is not to expose all the parameters of break_command_really outside of breakpoint.c. So, unless there is a problem with the current approach, I would prefer not to change it. In the alternative, if somebody does want to approve this, I would like to recommend renaming break_command_really, as I don't think that is a very good name for a public function. Tom