Re: [RFA] Reverse debugging, part 2/3: core interface

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 11:10:17 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
> 
> On Sat, Apr 01, 2006 at 03:34:39PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > In addition, I think "Run back to call of FOO" is not very clear.  I
> > wanted to suggest "Run to entry to FOO", but then I realized it would
> > be a lie: we do back up past the entry, to the instruction that
> > actually calls the function we are in, right?  Perhaps "Run back to
> > before the call to FOO" is better, even though it is wordier?
> 
> How about "Run back to call site of FOO"?  That's a pretty clear term.

Fine with me.

> > > ! 	  if (debug_infrun)
> > > ! 	    fprintf_unfiltered (gdb_stdlog, 
> > > ! 				"infrun: stepped to a different function\n");
> > 
> > _() is missing around the message string (yes, I know it was missing
> > in the original code as well, but...).
> 
> I thought we'd decided not to translate debug messages.
> 
> But I can't remember for sure

Neither do I.

> Sounds to me like we need the Coding chapter of gdbint.texinfo to
> record decisions about this :-)

Why not?  Feel free to write it up.