From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-83785-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 25351 invoked by alias); 19 Sep 2011 18:57:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 25342 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Sep 2011 18:57:21 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_BP,TW_TB
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; Mon, 19 Sep 2011 18:57:02 +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 (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p8JIuwYl021183	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);	Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:56:58 -0400
Received: from psique ([10.3.112.6])	by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p8JIussb008947;	Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:56:56 -0400
From: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com>
To: Stan Shebs <stanshebs@earthlink.net>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add command resetbpnum for reset $bpnum
References: <CANFwon0CgAn4UHi6d=CHSB69mRqYCFx0Xbfay7ZHD7ML1ur8iQ@mail.gmail.com>	<4E777733.8010107@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 19:02:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <4E777733.8010107@earthlink.net> (Stan Shebs's message of "Mon,	19 Sep 2011 10:09:07 -0700")
Message-ID: <m3zki0e4y1.fsf@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (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: 2011-09/txt/msg00365.txt.bz2

Stan Shebs <stanshebs@earthlink.net> writes:

> So before breaking before one of the longest-standing UI design
> decisions in GDB, it seems like we ought to get a little more
> understanding of why a user might want to reset breakpoint numbering.

I second that.  I read the patch and couldn't come up with a scenario
where the user would want to use this `reset' feature.  Hui, can you
explain a bit more why you thought this would be a good idea?  I was not
convinced by your example.