From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28741 invoked by alias); 30 Dec 2006 15:55:36 -0000 Received: (qmail 28729 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Dec 2006 15:55:36 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nitzan.inter.net.il (HELO nitzan.inter.net.il) (192.114.186.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 15:55:30 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-84-229-225-74.inter.net.il [84.229.225.74]) by nitzan.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) with ESMTP id FPF51226 (AUTH halo1); Sat, 30 Dec 2006 17:55:25 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 15:55:00 -0000 Message-Id: From: Eli Zaretskii To: Joel Brobecker CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20061230032111.GB27642@adacore.com> (message from Joel Brobecker on Sat, 30 Dec 2006 07:21:11 +0400) Subject: Re: [RFC/RFA] Add support for catch Ada exceptions Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii References: <20061230032111.GB27642@adacore.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2006-12/txt/msg00361.txt.bz2 > Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 07:21:11 +0400 > From: Joel Brobecker > > Here is a patch that adds support for "catch"-ing Ada exceptions. Thanks! > (gdb) catch exception > Catchpoint 1 on all Ada exceptions at 0x804b7c0 > (gdb) info break > Num Type Disp Enb Address What > 1 catch exception keep y 0x0804b7c0 on all Ada exceptions I don't like this ``on'' business. How about removing it? (gdb) catch exception Catchpoint 1: all Ada exceptions at 0x804b7c0 (gdb) info break Num Type Disp Enb Address What 1 catch exception keep y 0x0804b7c0 all Ada exceptions > (gdb) catch exception program_error > Catchpoint 1 on `program_error' Ada exception at 0x804b7c0 > (gdb) catch assert > Catchpoint 2 on failed Ada assertions at 0x804c437 > (gdb) catch exception unhandled > Catchpoint 3 on unhandled Ada exceptions at 0x804ad2d Again, removing the ``on'' part makes it sound better, IMO: (gdb) catch exception program_error Catchpoint 1: `program_error' Ada exception at 0x804b7c0 (gdb) catch assert Catchpoint 2: failed Ada assertions at 0x804c437 (gdb) catch exception unhandled Catchpoint 3: unhandled Ada exceptions at 0x804ad2d Btw, do we need to display the address? The fact that you actually implement this as breakpoints is an implementation detail; the user doesn't need to know, I think. > I will also write some documentation, but I want to make sure that > at least the user-interface is agreed on before I start this work. You have my blessing for the UI, with the exception of the above minor comments. I'm eagerly awaiting to see the docs ;-).